Perjury or private complaint on public prosecutor?

The general rule is if fabrication has been done after the proceedings have started in Court - and such fabrication is done while the document is " custodia legis"  the bar of S. 195 shall hold and so, petition to the Court u/s 340 is required. It is for the Court then to direct further investigations etc.

if however, the documents were forged/ fabricated outside the court and then produced in court S. 195 does not hold and complainant may proceed to a direct filing of a separate complaint.

in your case I understand the Public Prosecutor has made a false statement in Court. If it has been done knowingly and is material to the cause of justice you should proceed u/s 195 as the falsification has happened within court not outside.

The APP cannot make a false statement  neither he is required to depose statement on oath therfore no perjury case can be maintainable against him.  The APP is the government representative, appointed for prosecuting on behalf of the state,therefore he has immunity that way. What is your lawyer's opinion about this?  Consult him before taking any such decision. 

The false statements were made by the APP in a petition filed with the court for taking further action on the matter.The Govt. department which the APP claimed had taken action against the said persons replied that they had not  taken any such action.  Also the court in which the petition was filed too replied that no such information/letter was received from the Govt. department in respect of what was stated by the APP.

the petition was filed by the APP as part of judicial proceedings.  though oath is not involved, is a judicial officer who is the representative of the State not liable for making false statements in the petition?  the APP being the representative of State can plead with the court to take action against the persons as per Law.  but he cannot misrepresent [i say commit fraud, as the statements are made deliberately and knowing that the Govt, dept, had not taken any such action as claimed in the petition] to the court and seek court's interference/further action from the court.  the same can be sought of the court even without such misrepresentation/fraud.  

is the APP not liable for such misrepresentation/fraud.  Contempt of court for misleading and misrepresenting to court is not possible as the limitation period is only one year for contempt.  is he not liable for perjury?  though it is not made on oath, the petition forms part of judicial proceedings.

Since the supreme court has ruled in April 2015 that permission u/s. 197 CRPC is not required when govt servants do things which are not related to their official duties, can a private complaint be lodged with the court?  or can a writ of mandamus filed in HC to direct the Director of Prosecutions to take action against the APP? 

The APP is prosecuting on behalf of the state, you have all the liberty to pove his cae wrong and his evidences false during trial and argument, get the judgment delivered in you favor highlighting the false evidences produced by APP, then you have a case for moving against the APP for his deliberations.  If you are not a lawyer yourself, what is your lawyer's opinion?

If proceedings is initiated against APP it will crippled the freedom of the Public Prosecutor in functioning effectively and such matter will certainly results in serious miscrriage in administration of justice and no Advocate would be safe if such proceedings are initiated on the basis of some trifle matters or lapses on the part of Public Prosecutor. Howver, the role of Public Prosecutor is  to prosecute and not to  persecute and obtain convictions by hook or crook, and can not indulged in submitting false evidence before the court, as it is his duy to be fair to the court. I am of the view that if the Public prosecutor forged documents which are in the custody of the court to convict the accused, he will certainly be liable to answer to the charge of Perjury according to law.

Regarding the recent statements of Law by the Supreme Court on Section 197 crPc, it is only the restatements of Law, which has been laid down in various cases by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the said section.After all, if a doctor pick pocket his patients while examining the patient, it certainly is not a part of his oficial duty and invoke the protection under section 197 CrPc.Likewise, rape, theft, misappropriation,forgery or murder etc; can not be a part of any official duty.