The Supreme Court remains wire against Lakshya Sen in case of old -age fraud

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court forbade Karnataka police to do any coercive measures against Badminton Lakshya Sen, members of his family and coach for forging birth certificates.

A justice bank Sudhanshu DHULIA and K Vinod Chandran issued a notification to the Karnataka Government and the applicant MG Nagaraj, who claimed Sen’s birth certificates and his brother Chirag Sen.

The top court heard a challenging plea of ​​the Order of February 19 of the High Court of Karnataka, which rejected the petitions deposited by Sen, his family members and his coach U Vimal Kumar.

The High Court has decided that there is the first facie evidence that justifies an investigation of the case.

The case comes from a private complaint filed by Nagaraj, who supported the parents of Sen, Dhirendra and Nirmala Sen, together with his brother, the coach and an employee of the Badminton Karnataka Association, were involved in falsifying the birth records.

According to the complaint, the accused would have manipulated the birth certificates of the SEN brothers, reducing their age by about two and a half years.

The alleged false was intended to allow them to participate in restricted Badminton tournaments and to benefit from government benefits.

Narăjraj has supported his requests with the documents obtained under the RTI ACT and asked the court to convene original records from the India Sports Authority (SAI) and the Ministry of Youth and Sport of New Delhi. Based on this evidence, the court has guided the High Grounds police station to carry out an investigation.

Following the court directive, the police have registered a wire in sections 420 (deception), 468 (false) and 471 (using forged documents) by ICC.

However, the petitioners moved the High Court Karnataka in 2022, ensuring a provisional order that blocked the investigation.

The petitioners claimed that the complaint and the subsequent wire were devoid of basic, motivated and intended to harass them.

They claimed that Nagaraj acted following the personal vendence, claiming that his daughter asked to join the Prakash Padukone Badminton Academy in 2020, but was not selected after the evaluation process. Kumar, a coach at the Academy, was appointed in the complaint.

The High Court, while rejecting the petitions, noticed that the petitioner’s lawyer did not show arguments, despite the fact that they offered sufficient opportunities and refused more time.