CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH Original Application No. 332/00100/2015 Order reserved on: 24.10.2024 Order pronounced on: 06.11.2024 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER (J), HON’BLE MR. PANKAJ KUMAR, MEMBER (A)

Smt. Mamta Rani Shukla, aged about 49 years, W/o late Sri G. D.

Shukla, R/o House No. Type II/117 Akansha Parisar, Pocket „A‟, Jankipuram, Lucknow.

..Applicant By Advocate: Shri Dharmendra Awasthi.

VERSUS

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi.

2. The Office of Registrar General, Ministry of Home Affairs, 24, Man Singh Road, New Delhi 110001.

3. The Director, Census Operations of Uttar Pradesh, Ministry of Home Affairs, Plot No. CC-1, Sector „G‟, Aliganj, Lucknow 226024.

4. The Assistant Director (Admn.), Census Operations of Uttar Pradesh, Ministry of Home Affairs, Plot No. CC-1, Sector „G‟, Aliganj, Lucknow 226024.

5. Sri Umar Daraz Ahmad, Upper Division Clerk, Census Operations of Uttar Pradesh, Ministry of Home Affairs, Plot No. CC-1, Sector „G‟, Aliganj, Lucknow 226024.

6. Smt. Sushama Nigam, Lower Division Clerk, Census Operations of Uttar Pradesh, Ministry of Home Affairs, Plot No. CC-1, Sector „G‟, Aliganj, Lucknow 226024.

…..Respondents By Advocate: Shri Shailen Verma R- 1 to 4, Shri Prince Lenin R-5.

O R D E R

PER HON’BLE JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER (J)

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.

2. Through M. A. No. 2564 of 2024, applicant has prayed to dismiss the OA as not pressed.

3. Through M. A. No. 2237 of 2023, respondent no. 5 – Umar Daraz Ahmad has made the following prayer:-

“That this Hon‟ble Court may graciously be pleased to prosecute the applicant Mamta Rani Shukla u/s 195 CrPC read with section 340 CrPC for filing forged and fabricated document as Annexure No. 8 along with the present OA No. 100 of 2015, thereby intentionally has fabricated the aforesaid document to be used as evidence in the present proceedings which are of judicial nature for the purpose of misleading this Hon‟ble Court to form an opinion on the said document (Annexure No. 8 of Original Application No. 100 of 2015 Mamta Rani Shukla Vs. Union of India & ors.)”

4. In Para 9 of the accompanying affidavit of M.A. No. 2237 of 2023, the following averment has been made:-

“That thus it is evident from the perusal of the aforesaid letter dated 06.09.2019 issued by Deputy Director, Administration, Directorate of Census Operation, U.P., Lucknow, that the document filed by the applicant as Annexure No. 8 alongwith the O.A. No. 100 of 2015 is a forged and fabricated document filed intentionally to be used as evidence in the present proceedings which are of judicial nature for the purpose of misleading this Hon‟ble Court to form an opinion on the said forged and fabricated document (Annexure No. 8 of the Original Application No. 100 of 2015 Mamta Rani Shukla vs. Union of India &

Ors.) and thus have committed offences u/s 191,192 & 193 IPC.”

5. Thus through M.A. No. 2237 of 2023, respondent no. 5 has prayed for initiating criminal proceedings against the applicant Mamta Rani Shukla for filing of Annexure No. 8 allegedly forged and fabricated document.

6. In the matter of Iqbal Sing Marwah & Anr. vs. Meenakshi Marwah & Anr., [(2005) 4 SCC 370], the Constitution Bench of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in Para 25 and 26 has held as follows:

“25. In view of the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that Sachida Nand Singh has been correctly decided and the view taken therein is the correct view. Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. would be attracted only when the offences enumerated in the said provision have been committed with respect to a document after it has been produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court i.e. during the time when the document was in custodia legis.

26. In the present case, the will has been produced in the Court subsequently. It is nobody’s case that any offence as enumerated in Section 195(b)(