Badminton at Olympics: Lakshya Sen falls to Axelsen in semis, to play bronze-medal playoff
Paris, Aug 4: India's dream of a first-ever Olympic gold in badminton will remain unfulfilled after Lakshya Sen suffered a straight-game defeat to reigning champion Viktor Axelsen in the men's singles semifinals at the Paris Games here on Sunday.
The 22-year-old from Almora, a world championships bronze medallist, squandered a three-point advantage in the first game and a 7-0 lead in the second to surrender 20-22 14-21 to the two-time world champion Axelsen in a 54-minute semifinal clash.
Sen will get another chance to become the first Indian male shuttler to win an Olympic medal when he meets Lee Zii Jia of Malaysia in the bronze medal playoff.
India have never won an Olympic gold medal in badminton with PV Sindhu claiming a silver and bronze at the Rio and Tokyo editions and Saina Nehwal securing a bronze in the London Games.
It was Sen's eighth loss to the Danish star with the Indian beating him only once at the 2022 German Open final.
"If I would have closed the first game, then I would have had better chance of closing the match. In the second game also, I started well but couldn't keep the lead," Sen told the broadcaster after the contest.
About losing the first game after being 20-17 ahead, Sen said "As the game went on, he started attacking more and I became passive, only defending. I should have taken chances and attacked more."
Axelsen thus made it to his second successive final at the Olympics and is now one step away from joining Chinese legend Lin Dan as a two-time gold medallist.
Of all his previous losses, this will hurt Sen the most as he had the chance to deal the first blow on his fancied opponent, but instead, he wilted under pressure against the towering Dane, who always found a way to wriggle out of tricky situations.
Axelsen's delaying tactics while serving also unsettled Sen a bit.
Sen struggled with the length, spraying wide and long to concede a 2-5 lead early on. He drew parity with a cross-court shot and then tried to construct the rallies. His trademark cross-court smashes deep into his opponent's forehand helped him to lead 8-7 at one stage.
The Indian kept the pressure on Axelsen and another fine cross-court and an on-the-line return gave him a two-point advantage.
Sen's patient play worked as Axelsen made a series of unforced errors to concede a 9-15 lead.
Axelsen won two good rallies, including one involving 43 shots. Soon, Sen moved to 17-11, but Axelsen then started dominating proceedings and rained down a monstrous forehand to narrow the lead down to 16-18.
Sen left his opponent wrong-footed with an away shot and then produced another incredible cross-court to gather three game points.
But the youngster imploded next as he lost all three of them after serving into net and going long twice. Sen sent a return to serve out and netted again to hand over the opening game to his rival.
Sen recovered quickly from the opening game reversal to zoom to a 7-0 lead after the change of sides but he flattered to deceive, as Axelsen scripted a stunning fightback.
The Indian looked too defensive and committed a series of unforced errors as the Dane made it 7-8 after nailing down another forehand smash.
At 10-7, Sen lost his racquet while defending a smash from Axelsen, who was back on level terms with another thundering smash. The Indian, however, managed a one-point advantage at the break, when the Dane erred.
Sen tried to up his game but Axelsen was alert and looked in good flow as he moved to 15-12 with his opponent missing the lines too often.
Axelsen looked in complete control as he rained down those forehand smashes at will to move to 19-14. A flat exchange ended at the net from Sen and it was six match points for the Dane, who sealed it when the Indian went wide again.
Summing up the match, Sen said, "I would take my learnings and positives from this game and give my 100 percent in bronze medal match.
"My parents, brother (Chirag Sen) is there in stands to support me. My mother is cooking lunch and dinner and sending me. I have got lot of support from the crowd and hope they will come tomorrow for the bronze medal match also."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
