In a significant legal development, the Karnataka High Court has rejected petitions filed by ace badminton player Lakshya Sen, his family, and coach U Vimal Kumar regarding allegations of fabricating birth certificates. The court has ruled that there is prima facie evidence to warrant an investigation into the matter.
The case stems from a private complaint filed by MG Nagaraj, who accused Lakshya Sen’s parents—Dhirendra and Nirmala Sen—his brother Chirag Sen, coach U Vimal Kumar, and a Karnataka Badminton Association employee of being involved in the falsification of birth records. According to the complaint, the accused allegedly altered the birth certificates of both Lakshya and Chirag Sen, reducing their ages by approximately two and a half years. This forgery, as per Nagaraj, was intended to enable the players to participate in age-restricted badminton tournaments and access government benefits.
Nagaraj supported his claims with documents obtained through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, and sought the court’s assistance in obtaining original records from the Sports Authority of India (SAI) and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. In response to these submissions, the court directed the High Grounds police station to conduct an investigation into the matter.
Following the court’s directive, the police registered a First Information Report (FIR) under Sections 420 (cheating), 468 (forgery), and 471 (using forged documents as genuine) of the Indian Penal Code. However, in 2022, the petitioners filed their appeals in the Karnataka High Court, which led to an interim order temporarily halting the investigation.
In their defense, the petitioners claimed that the allegations and subsequent FIR were baseless and motivated by personal vendettas. They argued that Nagaraj’s complaint was the result of frustration, as his daughter was not selected after an evaluation at the Prakash Padukone Badminton Academy in 2020, where Vimal Kumar is a coach.
Justice M.G. Uma, in her ruling, dismissed the petitions and noted that the petitioners had failed to present their arguments adequately despite being given multiple opportunities. The judge also rejected requests for more time. “When prima facie materials are placed on record that constitute the offenses, I do not find any reason to stall the investigation or quash the criminal proceedings,” stated Justice Uma. The court further emphasized that the documentary evidence provided by the complainant, obtained through RTI, was sufficient to justify an investigation into the case.
