BackSC to consider plea regarding conflict of interest regulation in BCCI
The apex court has been considering this issue over the past few hearings
Premium
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear an appeal against a Bombay high court decision to dismiss a Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB) petition challenging the amendment to a rule framed by India’s cricket board to allow its officials to hold a commercial interest in tournaments such as the Indian Premier League (IPL).
CAB is also a petitioner in the case regarding betting and spot-fixing allegations in the sixth season of the IPL cricket tournament.
Regulation 6.2.4 of the Board for Control of Cricket in India (BCCI) says that “except Indian Premier League (IPL) and Champions League Twenty20, no administrator, officer, player or umpire shall have any direct or indirect commercial interest in the matches or events conducted by the board", an amendment brought about in 2008, when N. Srinivasan was the secretary of the BCCI. This amendment was challenged by CAB before the Bombay high court in a public interest litigation. The high court, however, dismissed the same in November.
A two-judge bench of justices T.S. Thakur and F.M.I. Kalifulla said that hearing this appeal could address the issue of conflict of interest in N. Srinivasan’s stakes in the IPL franchise Chennai Super Kings. The apex court has been considering this issue over the past few hearings.
The court also questioned IPL chief operating officer Sundar Raman about his conversations with Vindoo Dara Singh, who was allegedly “the contact of a bookie". Raman told the court that he had been informed “in-passing" of incidents of betting by owners and officials of IPL franchisees by one Y.P. Singh, an official from International Cricket Council’s Anti Corruption and Security Unit (ACSU) who was appointed by the BCCI to track and report corrupt practices in the IPL. However, since Singh did not have any “actionable information" to substantiate these claims, Raman could not pursue it any further.
Calling such a stand “convenient", the bench lamented that Raman had “done nothing" about such serious allegations and was “just watching the fun".
Former Punjab Cricket Association president I.S. Bindra has also intervened in the case calling the amendment to regulation 6.2.4 the “heart of the problem" and urging the apex court to intervene in the matter.
The apex court had appointed a committee headed by former judge Mukul Mudgal to probe the betting and spot fixing allegations that came to light during the sixth edition of IPL. Srinivasan’s son-in-law, Gurunath Meiyappan was found guilty of betting in Mudgal committee’s final report, submitted to the court on 3 November.
The apex court had asked Srinivasan, Meiyappan, Raman and Kundra to respond after the Mudgal committee’s final report had named them. The court, on 14 November, had suggested that they may have committed certain “misdemeanours" which would need to be examined.
Shreeja Sen contributed to this story.
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!
