Panaji, Aug 18: In a serious case raising questions of alleged impersonation, forgery and misuse of a citizen’s identity, RTI activist Atmaram D. Gadekar of Canca, Parra, Bardez, has approached the Goa Crime Branch seeking registration of an FIR against unknown persons who, he alleges, repeatedly used his name, address and forged signature to submit complaints, Right to Information applications and other correspondence to government and police authorities.

In his detailed complaint dated August 17, Gadekar has alleged that communications were being sent in his name without his knowledge, consent or authorisation. He has categorically denied having signed or submitted the disputed communications or having authorised anyone to act on his behalf.

The complaint assumes greater significance as Gadekar has expressed a strong suspicion that a police personnel could possibly be involved, citing what he describes as a recurring pattern in which communications made in his name were predominantly directed against police personnel and police establishments. He has, however, not named any individual and has specifically sought an investigation to establish the identity of those responsible.

Gadekar has claimed that seven complaints were recently dispatched through Speed Post from the Mapusa Head Post Office—three on July 15 or 16 and another four on July 27, 2026. According to him, these complaints, purportedly made in his name, contained allegations against certain Crime Branch officials and others whom he says he does not even know.

Copies were allegedly sent to senior authorities, including the Director of Vigilance, Chief Secretary, Chief Minister, State Police Complaints Authority, North Goa Superintendent of Police, Director General of Police and Deputy Inspector General of Police.

Alleged forgery surfaced during Crime Branch inquiry

According to Gadekar, the matter came to light after he was summoned before the Crime Branch in connection with one such communication. During the inquiry, he was shown a letter received by the authorities and the signature appearing on it.

Gadekar claims he informed investigators that the signature was not his and appeared to be an imitation of his genuine signature. While it bore a resemblance to his signature, he claimed there were identifiable differences.

He has consequently requested that the disputed documents and signatures be sent for scientific examination by a competent handwriting/document expert after obtaining specimens of his admitted signatures.

The complaint further claims that similar instances were noticed earlier, including communications allegedly received by the Police Establishment Board and Home Department in 2025 in which his name and address were allegedly used along with purported signatures.

UPI payment could provide crucial lead

A potentially significant aspect highlighted in the complaint concerns the Speed Post consignment booked at Mapusa Head Post Office on July 27.

Gadekar claims that during the Crime Branch inquiry it emerged that the postal charges for the article were paid through UPI. He has therefore urged investigators to obtain the complete transaction trail, including the transaction ID, date and time, UPI ID/VPA, remitter and account-holder details.

He has argued that identifying the person who made the payment could provide a crucial lead to the person who actually booked or arranged the dispatch.

However, Gadekar has urged police not to stop the investigation merely with the person who made the UPI payment or physically posted the article. He wants investigators to determine who allegedly conceived and prepared the complaints, supplied their contents, imitated his signature, arranged the payment and instructed the dispatch.

If the person who physically dispatched the communication was acting at somebody else’s direction, Gadekar has demanded that investigators identify the alleged mastermind and all others who may have financed, facilitated, abetted or orchestrated the operation.

Fear of identity being used as a ‘facade’

The activist has raised an even more serious apprehension that the repeated misuse of his identity could potentially be part of a larger mechanism in which complaints or RTI applications are made in another person’s name to exert pressure, harass individuals or secure an unlawful advantage.

Gadekar has stressed that this is his apprehension and has asked investigators to objectively examine this angle. He has categorically denied any connection with such activity.

Preserve Mapusa post office CCTV immediately

With electronic evidence potentially crucial to identifying the person behind the postal dispatch, Gadekar has demanded immediate preservation of CCTV footage from the Mapusa Head Post Office for July 27, 2026.

He fears the footage could be automatically overwritten under the post office’s data-retention cycle.

He has therefore requested preservation of footage covering the relevant booking counter, surrounding areas and entry and exit points, besides postal booking and dispatch records, the original envelope and contents, payment details and UPI trail.

He has also sought examination of earlier postal records and communications to determine whether they reveal a common source, authorship or modus operandi.

‘Probe possible involvement of police personnel’

One of the strongest portions of Gadekar’s complaint concerns his suspicion about possible involvement of someone connected to the police establishment.

He argues that since several disputed communications were allegedly directed against police personnel, investigators should examine whether the person responsible had access to or knowledge of police-related matters.

Gadekar has demanded that if investigation eventually establishes the involvement of any serving police personnel, there should be no leniency and both criminal as well as appropriate departmental proceedings should follow.

Importantly, the complaint at this stage contains Gadekar’s allegations and suspicions; it does not establish that any police officer was involved. That question can only be determined through investigation.

FIR sought under BNS provisions

Gadekar has requested registration of an FIR for alleged criminal conspiracy, cheating by personation, making false documents, forgery, providing false information to public servants and defamation, among other offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

He has sought identification of the actual author of the disputed communications, the person who allegedly forged his signature, the person responsible for the UPI payment and dispatch, and any person who may have directed, financed or facilitated the alleged activity.

Copies of the complaint have also been marked to the Chief Minister, Chief Secretary, Director of Vigilance, Director General of Police, State Police Complaints Authority and DIG.

The allegations bring the spotlight onto a disturbing question: who was allegedly using Gadekar’s identity to target police officers and other individuals, and for what purpose?

The answer could lie in the digital payment trail, postal records, CCTV footage and forensic examination of the disputed signatures—evidence that Gadekar now wants the Crime Branch to secure before it disappears. The development has also been reported publicly as Gadekar approaching the Crime Branch over alleged repeated misuse of his identity for complaints and RTI-related communications.