Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Impersonator Posing as Judge, IAS Officer

The Delhi High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail application of a serial fraudster accused of posing as a Patna High Court judge and a senior civil servant to extract sensitive government data, severely reprimanding the Delhi Police for failing to arrest him despite multiple court rejections.

Justice Girish Kathpalia dismissed the plea filed by Manoj Kumar Jha, noting that the accused is a ‘habitual offender’ with a widespread criminal record across multiple states. The HC further highlighted that the Supreme Court had already refused him relief in September 2025, leaving no change in circumstances to justify granting bail now.

Expressing deep concern over police inaction, the court remarked that the investigating agency’s failure to arrest Jha gave the impression that he was receiving internal assistance, noting that "there is something more that meets the eye." A copy of the order was directed to the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) for immediate necessary action.

Serial Impersonation and Multi-State Fraud Schemes

According to the prosecution, the case originates from an FIR registered in 2024 at the Parliament Street Police Station under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Investigators allege that Jha repeatedly impersonated high-ranking constitutional and administrative authorities including a sitting judge of the Patna High Court and a senior civil servant in an attempt to procure classified documents and sensitive official details.

The court noted Jha’s extensive criminal track record across Delhi, Punjab, Haryana, Bihar, Chandigarh, and Gurugram. In one notable Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) case, Jha allegedly defrauded a victim of ₹80 lakh by posing as the Chairman of the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI). A previous search on his premises in Bokaro, Jharkhand, had yielded 200 SIM cards allegedly used to facilitate hawala operations to Kolkata.

Defense Cites Non-Arrest to Claim Custodial Interrogation Unnecessary

Seeking relief in his third anticipatory bail attempt before the HC, counsel for the accused argued that because the investigating agency had not arrested Jha despite his previous bail rejections in 2024, 2025, and by the Supreme Court on September 8, 2025, his custodial interrogation was no longer required by law.

Strict Judicial Discipline Trumps Repeated Bail Applications

Refusing to override the apex court's prior standing, Justice Kathpalia emphasised the necessity of maintaining judicial discipline. The court ruled that trial courts and High Courts cannot re-examine bail pleas once the Supreme Court has ruled on the matter, unless significant new facts or material changes in circumstances are presented.

The High Court held that the severity of the charges, coupled with the risk of reoffending, far outweighed the defense’s arguments, making the case entirely unfit for pre-arrest bail.