The act of forging documents by a public servant cannot be considered as an act in discharge of official duty, and the requirement of sanction for prosecution under section 197 Cr.P.C. can be raised at any stage of the proceedings and decided based on evidence adduced during the trial.

JUDGMENT :

1. Today, Sri Anil Kumar Mishra has filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 which is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Imran Ullah, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. By means of present 482 Cr.P.C. application, the applicant has prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings of case crime no. 263 of 2018 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 201, 120-B I.P.C., police station Jahanganj, District Azamgarh.

4. The brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. was lodged by opposite party no. 2 Smt. Asha Devi on 11.12.2018 at police station Jahanganj, District Azamgarh for the offence under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 201, 120-B I.P.C. with an allegation that the applicant had helped the father of the accused of a case of rape by changing the date of birth of her minor daughter, namely, Km. Shikha Singh. It is alleged that on 13.5.2018, one Arvind @ Kallu had committed rape of the daughter of the complainant for which an F.I.R. was lodged by her which was registered as case crime no. 116 of 2018. It seems that the father of the accused, in order to save his son from criminal prosecution, in collusion with the applicant, has done fraud with the official papers and have issued a transfer certificate showing her date of birth as 8.2.2000, thereafter, it was signed by the Block Education Officer and Basic Education Officer. The said certificate was filed in the bail application of Kallu before this Court. It is alleged that when she came to know about the said fact through her counsel various complaints were made by her against the applicant on which on 27.9.2018, the applicant was given charge-sheet by the Department and in the meanwhile he was suspended. It is also alleged that before his suspension, the applicant in order to save his suspension, had stolen certain papers from the file. It is further alleged that after rejection of bail, the accused Arvind Singh started threatening him due to which, she is terrorized.

5. After investigation, the investigating officer submitted charge-sheet against the applicant on 14.7.2019 and the learned Magistrate on the basis of the charge-sheet took cognizance of the offence on 12.10.2018 and summoned the applicant to face trial.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is posted as Principal of a Primary Education Institution and the cognizance which has been taken on the basis of charge-sheet is absolutely wrong as no sanction for prosecution of the applicant under section 197 Cr.P.C. has been obtained from the competent authority and without sanction the proceedings against the applicant is liable to be quashed. He submits that the applicant in discharge of his official duty had issued the transfer certificate of the daughter of the informant wherein her date of birth has been mentioned as 8.2.2000 which was endorsed in the admission register of primary school Gambheervan-I, Rani ki Sarai, district Azamgarh where the daughter of the informant studied upto Class-III and she did not turn up in the said school and finally on 25.8.2017, she left the school and a transfer certificate was prepared on 12.10.2017. He further submits that the date of birth which was mentioned in the school register of the minor daughter of the opposite party no. 2 was on the information given by the grand mother of the minor daughter of opposite party no. 2 at the time of her admission. He next submitted that at the most the negligence on the part of the applicant is that he had issued the transfer certificate to a person, who was not authorized to get the same issued except the opposite party no. 2 or any of the family member of Km. Shikha Singh. He pointed out that a departmental proceedings with respect to the same allegation is going on, hence the present proceeding is liable to be quashed. In support of his argument, h