$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010346962026 + CRL.A. 723/2026 SH RAKESH KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Mahipal Singh Rajput and Mr. Yogendra Tripathi, Advocates, with the appellant in person. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER, MCD LAW DEPARTMENT HQ & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kapil Dutta, Mr. Aman Sharma and Ms. Megha Sharma, Advocates for the MCD. Mr. Umang Tyagi and Mr. Sanyam Dahiya, Advocates for R-6 and R-7. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 16.09.2026 CRL.M.A. 23109/2026 (delay of 115 days in filing appeal) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 115 days in filing the appeal stands condoned. 2. The application stands disposed of. CRL.A. 723/2026 3. The present appeal, preferred under Section 380 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [‘BNSS’] (corresponding to Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘CrPC’]), is directed against the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2026 at 10:59:28 order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the Presiding Officer, Appellate Tribunal, MCD, in Appeal No. 481/2022, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 379 of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 340 of the CrPC) came to be rejected. 4. The appellant, appearing in person, submits that the record, in the form of the status reports filed by the officials of the MCD, was fabricated and was presented before the Court, and that the presiding officer, appellate tribunal, MCD, ought, therefore, to have lodged a complaint under Section 340 of the CrPC. It is contended that the order dated 22.01.2026, rejecting the said application, is erroneous. 5. The submissions are opposed by counsel appearing for the MCD, as well as by counsel appearing for respondent nos. 6 and 7, who submit that the application under Section 340 of the CrPC was rightly rejected, and that the appeal is devoid of merit, the ingredients necessary for the invocation of Section 340 of the CrPC not being made out on the facts of the present case. 6. I have heard the appellant, who appears in person, as well as counsel appearing for the respondents, and have perused the record. 7. The grievance of the appellant, in essence, is that the record was fabricated and presented before the Court. If that be so, the appellant would have to avail of the appropriate remedy available in law for the redressal of his grievance. 8. It is, however, well settled that, unless the alleged tampering of the record took place at a time when the record was in custodia legis, i.e., in the custody of the Court, the provisions of Section 340 of the CrPC would not be attracted, and the Court would not, therefore, be required to lodge a complaint. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2026 at 10:59:28 9. The aforesaid position has been noted by this Court in Pandit Digamber Sharma v. Ram Prakash Anand,1 wherein, following the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Iqbal Singh Marwah v. Meenakshi Marwah,2 it was held that Section 195(1)(b)(ii), read with Section 340 of the CrPC, is attracted only in respect of an offence committed in relation to a document while it was in custodia legis, and not in respect of a document said to have been fabricated prior to its production in Court. 10. Accordingly, and reserving all rights and contentions of the appellant, the present appeal fails and is dismissed. 11. The appellant is, however, granted liberty to take such appropriate recourse as may be available to him in accordance with law. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2026 aks/ad 12022 SCC OnLine Del 2657. 2(2005) 4 SCC 370. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2026 at 10:59:28