Back
Delhi High Court Denies to Serial Impersonator Manoj Kumar Jha After Delay
The has rejected the third application filed by Manoj Kumar Jha, an individual accused of systematically impersonating high-ranking civil servants and even a judge of the . The decision, delivered by Justice Girish Kathpalia, serves as a stern reminder of the limitations of for habitual offenders and highlights a disturbing trend of police inaction in the matter.
A Pattern of Deception
The case originated from FIR No. 81/, registered at Police Station Parliament Street, under sections of the concerning impersonation and the illicit acquisition of confidential government information. According to the prosecution, Jha allegedly posed as a government official to extract sensitive data from senior authorities.
This incident, however, appears to be just one chapter in a much longer narrative. Court records revealed that Jha has been named in a dozen distinct FIRs across several states, including Haryana, Punjab, Bihar, and Chandigarh. These charges span over a decade and include serious allegations of cheating, forgery, and extortion. Notably, he was previously apprehended by the for allegedly cheating an individual of ₹80 Lakhs while posing as the Chairman of the .
Arguments and Judicial Stance
Representing the accused, the defense argued that because the police had failed to arrest Jha despite the dismissal of his prior bail applications—including a rejection by the in —it was evident that his was not required by the investigating agency.
The State, however, mirrored the Court's frustration. The learned APP noted that despite the Supreme Court already concluding that the matter was not a fit case for relief, the investigating police force had inexplicably failed to execute an arrest.
Key Observations
Justice Kathpalia emphasized the necessity of maintaining judicial consistency and criticized the laxity in investigative proceedings:
-
"The Hon’ble Supreme Court also did not find it a fit case to grant and in any case, subsequent to the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, there is no change of circumstances."
-
"The local police appear to have taken no steps at all to arrest the accused/applicant, which conveys an impression that accused/applicant is being helped and there is something more that meets the eye."
-
"Apart from the nature of allegations, coupled with the fact that the accused/applicant is a , I am also governed by strict ."
A Demand for Accountability
Finding no grounds to deviate from previous judicial findings and noting the applicant’s status as a , the Court dismissed the bail plea. In an unusual and pointed directive, Justice Kathpalia ordered that a copy of the judgment be sent to the concerned for immediate information and necessary action, signaling that the lack of initiative by local law enforcement will no longer go unscrutinized. The dismissal underscores a rigid judicial stance against repeat offenders and demands a more proactive approach from the state machinery in the enforcement of the law.
