The Supreme Court of India, on February 25, issued notice in a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by Indian badminton player Lakshya Sen. The plea challenges the Karnataka High Court’s decision to reject his request to quash an investigation into allegations of fabricating birth certificates to participate in underage badminton tournaments.
A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran issued notice and put a hold on any coercive steps against Lakshya Sen and others involved in the case. The next hearing has been scheduled for April 16.
The controversy stems from a private complaint filed by Nagaraja M.G., who alleged that Lakshya Sen, his brother Chirag Sen, and their parents, in collaboration with a coach from the Karnataka Badminton Association, manipulated birth records. The alleged purpose was to lower their official ages by approximately two and a half years to qualify for junior badminton tournaments and gain government benefits.
The complaint is said to have been initiated based on information acquired under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. It further states that a departmental inquiry was conducted against Lakshya's father, a badminton coach at Prakash Padukone Badminton Academy. The inquiry concluded with a finding of guilt, which was subsequently upheld by the Disciplinary Authority.
Following the complainant’s request, the trial court summoned original records from the Sports Authority of India for verification. Subsequently, the matter was referred to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). As a result, a First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against the accused under Sections 420 (cheating), 468 (forgery for cheating), 471 (using forged documents), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
On February 19, Justice MG Uma of the Karnataka High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Lakshya Sen and others, stating:
"When prima facie materials are placed on record which constitute the offences, I do not find any reason either to stall the investigation or to quash the initiation of criminal proceedings. There are sufficient materials that are placed before the Court by the complainant which are the documents that are obtained under the Right to Information Act from the appropriate authority. Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to entertain the petitions."
Challenging the Karnataka High Court’s decision, Lakshya Sen and his legal team approached the Supreme Court. Senior Advocate Aryaman Sundaram, along with Advocates Badri Vishal, Varun Joshi, and Ayush Negi, represented the petitioners. Advocate on Record (AOR) Rohini Musa also appeared for them.
After reviewing the case, the Supreme Court decided to issue a notice and stayed any coercive action against the accused until the next hearing. This decision provides temporary relief to Lakshya Sen and his family as the legal battle continues.
Title: CHIRAG SEN AND ANR. v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR. | Diary No. 9824-2025