Read Time: 04 minutes
Khedkar had joined the Pune Collectorate for her probationary training in June. The allegations against her included misusing quotas under OBC and PwBD to clear the UPSC Examination. She was also accused of changing her and her parents' names on her official documents to gain more chances to appear for the examination. An FIR was filed along with a show cause notice to cancel her selection and to bar her from future examinations.
The Patiala House Court, on Wednesday, reserved its judgment in an anticipatory bail plea filed by an IAS trainee Puja Khedkar. She was accused of ‘misrepresenting information’ in her application for the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) Civil Services Examination, 2022.
Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar Jangala, after recording the submissions of the parties, reserved the verdict to be pronounced on Thursday (August 1, 2024) at 4 PM.
Advocate Bina Madhavan, representing Puja Khedkar, argued that Khedkar had not approached the media, trusting the judicial system instead. Advocate Bina Madhavan contended that Khedkar mentioned the number of attempts as five instead of twelve in good faith, and thus there was no misrepresentation. Advocate Bina Madhavan presented Khedkar's disability certificate, issued by a medical board of AIIMS, indicating she had 47% benchmark disabilities.
Advocate Bina Madhavan further argued that action could only be taken against Khedkar after a finding of guilt by the UPSC, rendering the criminal prosecution and FIR premature. Advocate Bina Madhavan questioned the swift filing of the FIR the day after the show cause notice was issued, emphasizing that Khedkar should be given ample opportunity to defend her case.
Additionally, Advocate Bina Madhavan claimed that the criminal prosecution was initiated because Khedkar had lodged a sexual harassment complaint against a Collector, which she refused to retract.
Special Public Prosecutor Atul Srivastava, representing the State, contended that Khedkar was guilty of cheating as she had deceived the UPSC. SPP Atul Srivastava highlighted that Khedkar had intentionally changed her name and concealed her true number of attempts, thereby disqualifying her from the examination.
Senior Advocate Naresh Kaushik, representing the UPSC, stated that Khedkar's admission of not disclosing her earlier attempts was tantamount to an admission of guilt. Senior Advocate Naresh Kaushik argued that Khedkar's actions deprived legitimate candidates of employment opportunities and breached the integrity of the examination system. Senior Advocate Naresh Kaushik underscored the premeditated nature of Khedkar's deceit, involving changing her name and those of her parents, which harmed genuine applicants' rights.
Accordingly, the court reserved its order to be announced on August 1, 2024 at 4 PM
Please Login or Register
