The Kerala PSC exam fraud case widened on Wednesday with the arrest of former deputy secretary P Satheesh, while commission chairman M R Baiju was questioned by the crime branch’s special investigation team in Thiruvananthapuram. The developments mark the first arrest in the investigation into alleged irregularities in examination-related activities at the state recruitment body.
Satheesh, who retired last year, was arrested from his residence in Kozhikode. He had headed the Kerala Public Service Commission’s examination wing and was responsible for evaluating the examination at the centre of the controversy, according to the Times of India report.
The arrest took place ahead of Baiju’s appearance before the SIT at the crime branch headquarters. The chairman arrived at about 2pm and was questioned by the team led by IG (Crimes) Ajeetha Begum. The questioning ended at around 8pm. Sources cited in the report said Baiju could be summoned again.
The investigation has also named R Hari, an additional secretary in the PSC examination wing, as an accused. The state government subsequently suspended Hari and withheld Satheesh’s retirement benefits. The action follows scrutiny of the alleged irregularities and the roles of officials connected with the examination wing.
The Kerala High Court had recently criticised the delay in taking action against those named in the case. The court questioned why concrete steps had not been taken despite there being no court directive preventing the investigation. It also raised suspicions about a possible understanding between the parties involved, as reported by the Times of India.
The case has implications beyond the functioning of one examination. The PSC is a gateway to state government employment, making the integrity of its examination and evaluation systems central to public confidence in recruitment. Any suspected manipulation can affect candidates who depend on the process for access to public-sector jobs, as well as the credibility of appointment lists generated through it.
Satheesh and Hari have reportedly maintained that the discrepancy resulted from a technical error rather than deliberate fraud. The crime branch, however, is understood to have gathered evidence pointing to their specific roles in the alleged irregularities. That distinction will now be examined through the investigation and any subsequent legal proceedings.
The SIT’s questioning of the PSC chairman indicates that investigators are examining the institutional chain around the examination, not only the conduct of individual officials. The reported possibility of another summons for Baiju suggests that the inquiry remains active. Further action will depend on the evidence collected by the crime branch and the next steps in the case.
