Man Held for Allegedly Posing as SP Over Gurugram Shop Power Cut

GURUGRAM: A Delhi resident has been arrested for allegedly impersonating a senior Himachal Pradesh Police officer while trying to get electricity restored to his wife's showroom at a Gurugram mall, police said.

The case began with a phone call to the official mobile number of the station house officer at DLF Sector 29 police station. According to investigators, the caller introduced himself as a superintendent of police from Himachal Pradesh and invoked a senior officer's name while pressing for immediate intervention in the power dispute.

The request concerned a showroom whose electricity had been disconnected by the mall management. Rather than acting on the caller's claimed rank, the SHO became suspicious and ordered verification. A police team checked the identity behind the call and concluded that the person was not the officer he had claimed to be. He was subsequently arrested in Gurugram.

Police allege that the shop belonged to the man's wife and that the call was intended to pressure the local station into securing reconnection. The underlying electricity dispute and the alleged impersonation are separate issues. A tenant or shop operator may pursue a grievance over disconnection through the mall, utility, civil or other competent forum; a disputed power cut does not authorise anyone to assume a public servant's identity.

The episode also shows why verification matters even when a caller displays familiarity with official ranks or uses the name of a senior functionary. A telephone claim can create urgency, particularly when it appears to come from another police force. Checking the caller through official channels prevents a local officer from lending state authority to a private commercial dispute.

An arrest is not a conviction. The allegation will have to be tested through call records, witness accounts and other evidence collected in the investigation, and the accused is entitled to contest the police case. Investigators are also examining whether the same method was used on any earlier occasion, though no additional incident has yet been established publicly.

For businesses, the lawful route in a utility disagreement remains documentation: retain bills and notices, record the reason given for a disconnection, and approach the responsible management or regulator. For public officials, the basic safeguard is equally clear: a designation mentioned over the phone should never replace identity verification.

Gurugram's malls contain hundreds of privately managed commercial units, making disagreements over service charges and utilities unsurprising. What turns this complaint into a criminal investigation is the alleged attempt to borrow the identity and influence of a senior police officer. The probe will now determine the precise call sequence and whether the evidence supports that accusation.