Tamil Nadu Judge's False Age Claim Unraveled by Supreme Court Probe

A Tamil Nadu judge's representation to change his date of birth has come under Supreme Court scrutiny after investigators discovered inconsistencies that suggest the claim was false. In 1993, Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate M. Manickam submitted a petition to the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Kanniyakumari seeking to alter his date of birth from March 19, 1947 to November 24, 1950—a change of over three years.

The discrepancy was uncovered through a detailed examination of personal records, including a horoscope notebook that contained the original date, alongside postal PIN code information and other documentary evidence. The findings suggest that Manickam's representation to the court contained false or misleading information, contradicting the official claim he sought to establish.

The case has raised concerns about the reliability of official records in the Indian judicial system and the procedures governing modifications to biographical data of government employees. Investigators determined that the documentary evidence, particularly the horoscope notebook maintained by the judge himself, corroborated the original date of birth rather than the altered version he had submitted.

The Supreme Court's investigation into the matter highlights potential lapses in verification procedures at the time such requests were processed. The case underscores the importance of cross-referencing multiple documentary sources when evaluating claims regarding changes to fundamental personal information in official records.