Supreme Court halts arrest of former IAS officer Pooja Khedkar

The Supreme Court on January 15 provided interim relief to former IAS officer Pooja Khedkar by staying her arrest until February 14. The apex court was hearing her anticipatory bail plea and overturned the Delhi High Court’s earlier order, dated December 23, which had denied her bail.

A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma issued notices to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) and the Delhi government, seeking their responses. Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Khedkar, argued that certain observations made in the Delhi High Court’s order could prejudice her trial. The Supreme Court acknowledged these concerns and scheduled the next hearing for February 14, 2025.

Pooja Khedkar faces allegations of cheating during the UPSC examination process and allegedly benefiting fraudulently from both the Other Backward Classes (OBC) and disability quotas. Following a complaint filed by UPSC, the Delhi Police registered a case against her, accusing her of fraud and forgery.

Her plea for anticipatory bail was initially rejected by the Patiala House Court on August 1, 2024. She then moved to the Delhi High Court, where her plea was dismissed on December 23, 2024. This led her to seek relief from the Supreme Court.

In a parallel development, UPSC announced that it has withdrawn a previous case involving allegations of false testimony against Pooja Khedkar. The commission stated its intention to file a new case, citing additional evidence and claiming that Khedkar attempted to manipulate the judicial process.

UPSC accused Khedkar of providing false affidavits and misleading the court by asserting that the commission had collected her biometric data, including eye and fingerprint scans, during the examination process. The commission clarified that it does not collect biometric data from candidates during personal interviews or at any stage of the examination process.

In its submission, UPSC also countered Khedkar’s claim in the High Court that she was not informed about the cancellation of her candidacy. The commission stated that she had been duly notified through her registered email. An FIR has been registered in connection with these allegations.