The Supreme Court rendered an opinion in a special leave on a special leave filed by the Indian badminton player Lakshya Sen, contesting the High Court of Karnataka rejecting his plea to cancel an investigation into the allegation of birth certificates to participate in the minor badminton tournament. A bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran judges sent an opinion and remained coercive measures against them. The case will now be heard on April 16.
Earlier, the High Court of Karnataka rejected the petitions deposited by the badminton player Lakshya Sen, family members and his coach U Vimar Kumar in the context of allegations for making birth certificates. The court judged that there were primary evidence justifying an investigation into the case. The case came from a private complaint filed by MG Nagaraj, who allegedly alleged that the parents of Lakshya Sen Dhirendra and Nirmala Sen, as well as his brother Chirag Sen, the coach U Vimar Kumar, and an employee of the Karnataka Badminton Association, were involved in records of falsification.
According to the complaint, the accused has manipulated the birth certificates of Lakshya and Chirag Sen, reducing their age of about two and a half years. The alleged counterfeiting aimed to allow them to participate in limited badminton tournaments and to benefit from the benefits of the government.
Nagaraj supported his complaints with documents obtained under the law on the right to information (RTI) and asked the court to convene original sports files atthority of India (SAI) and the Ministry of Youth and Sports Affairs in New Delhi. On the basis of these evidence, the court ordered the high motifs to conduct an investigation in the police station.
Following the court directive, the police recorded a first information report (FIR) under articles 420 (cheating), 468 (counterfeiting) and 471 (using forged and authentic documents). However, the petitioners moved the High Court of Karnataka in 2022, guaranteeing a provisional prescription that blocked the investigation.
The petitioners argued that the following complaint and FIR were baseless, motivated and intended to harass them. They allegedly alleged that Nagaraj acted outside the personal vendetta, saying that her daughter had applied to join the Prakash Padukone Badminton Academy in 2020 but was not selected after the evaluation process. Vimal Kumar, academy’s coach, was appointed in the complaint.
Judge MG UMA, while rejecting petitions, observed that the petitioner lawyer had not presented arguments despite the sufficient opportunities. The judge also refused a request for more time.
“When Prima Facie materials are placed in the file which constitute the offenses, I find no reason to stall the investigation or to cancel the criminal procedure,” said judge UMA. The court noted that the complainant had provided sufficient documentary evidence obtained via RTI, strengthening the need for an investigation.
With PTI entries
Subjects mentioned in this article
