The Supreme Court has put a hold on the legal proceedings against badminton player Lakshya Sen in a case involving alleged age fraud. The case revolves around accusations that Sen and his brother, Chirag Sen, manipulated their birth certificates to participate in junior badminton tournaments.
Background of the Case
The legal battle began when a complaint was filed by MG Nagaraj, who claimed that Lakshya Sen and his brother, Chirag Sen, had falsified their birth certificates. Nagaraj alleged that the brothers, with the help of their parents and coach, altered their birth dates to appear younger, allowing them to compete in tournaments for underage players. This alleged manipulation also enabled them to claim government benefits intended for younger athletes.
Based on Nagaraj’s complaint, the police in Bengaluru, Karnataka, registered a First Information Report (FIR). The FIR cited several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including:
- Section 420 (cheating)
- Section 468 (forgery)
- Section 471 (using forged documents as genuine)
High Court’s Decision
In 2022, Lakshya Sen, his brother, their parents, and their coach approached the Karnataka High Court, seeking to have the criminal proceedings against them quashed. However, on February 19, the High Court rejected their plea, allowing the investigation to continue. Justice MG Uma, presiding over the case, stated that there was sufficient evidence to suggest that the alleged offenses had been committed, and therefore, there was no reason to halt the investigation.
Supreme Court Intervention
Dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision, the Sen brothers and the other accused parties appealed to the Supreme Court. A Bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran heard the matter and decided to put a stay on the FIR. This means that the police investigation and any further legal actions against Lakshya Sen and the others are temporarily suspended.
The Supreme Court also requested responses from the Karnataka government and the original complainant, MG Nagaraj. They have been asked to present their arguments and evidence in the case. The court has scheduled the next hearing for April 16, 2025.
Arguments Presented
Senior Advocate CA Sundaram, along with Advocates Rohini Musa, Nipun Katyal, and Varun Joshi, represented the appellants (Lakshya Sen and others) in the Supreme Court. They argued that the High Court should have quashed the proceedings, as there was no solid evidence to support the allegations of age fraud. The petition was officially filed through Advocate on Record Badri Vishal.
Implications of the Stay Order
The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the FIR provides temporary relief to Lakshya Sen and his family. It means that they will not face immediate legal action while the case is under review by the top court. However, this is not a final verdict. The Supreme Court will examine the case in detail, considering the evidence and arguments from both sides, before making a final decision.
What’s Next?
The case is now set for a crucial hearing on April 16, 2025. The Supreme Court will review all the evidence, including the original complaint, the FIR, and the responses from the Karnataka government and the complainant. The court will then decide whether to lift the stay and allow the investigation to proceed, or to quash the FIR altogether, effectively ending the legal proceedings against Lakshya Sen and the others involved.
This case highlights the serious implications of age fraud in sports, not only affecting the integrity of competitions but also potentially impacting the careers and reputations of athletes. The Supreme Court’s final decision will be significant, setting a precedent for how such cases are handled in the future.
About Author
Akshita Garg is a career driven law student at Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, blending analytical precision with a passion for justice. With a foundation in Botany from Hansraj College, she brings a unique perspective to legal research and advocacy. Her experience spans legal drafting, research, and social impact initiatives, gained through internships at leading firms and NGOs. Known for her critical thinking and effective communication, she is committed to navigating the complexities of law to drive meaningful change.
