The Curious Case of Mohd. Zamal

According to a Jamia press release, a young man was caught impersonating a test candidate by the name of Mohd. Zamal at an admission entrance test in Jamia on Thursday, June 7.

Although Jamia alleges a case of impersonation by the said young  man, Jamia is unclear on many of the important details pertaining to the incident.

According to the written statement, on Thursday June 7, a test candidate taking the Social Science Group III entrance exam was singled out for scrutiny, when somehow someone recalled the young man taking another entrance test just a day earlier on June 6 for the Social Science Group I entrance exam.

The press release is unclear on why that would raise suspicion because it does not tell us whether taking the Social Science entrance test for Group I excludes a candidate from taking the test for Group III or vice versa. The cause for suspicion is left ambiguous.

Nevertheless, Jamia authorities on investigation found out that the photographs on both his admission forms were different, making a clear case of  deception by providing false information on the admission form.

Though we are told the photographs were different on the two admission forms,  Jamia fails to inform us on whether either of the photographs on the admission form were of the young man caught impersonating Mohd. Zamal.

Jamia does not mention whether they had ascertained the impersonator’s real identity, because all they mention in their written statement is that he was impersonating Mohd. Zamal, and the proof of which was that the photographs on the admission forms did not match.

They go on to say, that the impersonator was later handed over to the police, which is presumed to be standard practice in such cases.

What makes the whole case take a turn for the interesting is when a news report by the IANS news agency titled “Police release MP’s son held for impersonating in Jamia exam” dated June 8, states that the young man caught by Jamia was the son of a member of parliament from the BSP party. The news report does not mention the name of the young man or the name of his father, the MP.

The report goes on further to say, that the police had later released the young man on account of finding “no evidence” incriminating him for the crime.

According to the police, Jamia handed the young man over to them based on mere “suspicion.” And as there was no evidence to his crime, the police had to let him go free.

Apparently, the clear evidence of deception provided by Jamia in their press release was not considered to be real evidence by the police. It is odd that two different photographs for the same person merely amounted to suspicion for them.

For anybody who is familiar with the way our law enforcement agencies work, it is not too difficult to understand why the police could not find any evidence to hold the culprit, when clearly the evidence provided by Jamia should have been enough. Allegedly, he is the son of an MP, and given the way our political system works, an MP has enough clout to get away with murder; so to get his son released for a  misdemeanor like impersonating a test candidate at a university admission entrance exam should require very little effort.

Leaving aside the questionable conduct of the police, this incident of impersonation raises an interesting question: Why was the son of an MP impersonating someone else for an entrance exam? Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Shouldn’t someone else be impersonating him at an entrance exam? Isn’t it usually the case that someone rich and powerful gets someone smart to a take test on their behalf so they could pass the test?

This makes one wonder, who is this Mohd. Zamal, who found a son of an MP to take the test for him, and presumably thought he was smart enough to get him through the entrance exam?