BackSC poser: can Srinivasan own stake in IPL team?
Justice T.S. Thakur said the situation was akin to a 'mutual benefit society', and asked how BCCI's sidelined president could also own a team
Premium
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the rationale behind allowing the head of an organization like the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to hold a stake in a team participating in an event sponsored by the board like the Indian Premier League (IPL).
Justice T.S. Thakur, heading a two-judge bench that’s hearing a case related to the board, said the situation was akin to a “mutual benefit society", and asked how BCCI’s sidelined president N. Srinivasan could also own a team.
Senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, representing Srinivasan, denied that Srinivasan owned the Chennai Super Kings (CSK), an IPL franchisee. Srinivasan, who is managing director of India Cements Ltd, the company that owns CSK, has a 0.14% stake in India Cements. BCCI lawyer C.A. Sundaram told the court this was allowed under the society’s rules.
However, the court asked whether this situation could be allowed under general principles of law. “How far will it be fair?" the court asked.
“You have to be above suspicion," the court told Srinivasan, saying that “conflict of interest" between someone “managing BCCI" and “his team" had to be tested for any suspicion.
India Cements official Kasi Viswanathan declined to comment as the case is still being considered by the apex court.
To be sure, the remarks by judges in the course of a hearing are broad observations that may not necessarily weigh on the final ruling the court delivers.
A committee headed by former judge Mukul Mudgal this month submitted a report that cleared Srinivasan of betting and spot-fixing in last year’s edition of IPL, while finding his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan had engaged in betting.
The Supreme Court is now considering the future course of action after the submission of the report. The court said “certain grave issues" had arisen from the report, which needed to be addressed.
The court will continue hearing the case on Tuesday.
Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB), the petitioner in the case, also sought court directions to recall the order prohibiting disclosure of the names of players who figured in the Mudgal committee report and also requested access to the material on which the panel had based its findings. CAB also alleged that Srinivasan had “covered up" misconduct by Meiyappan.
In a reply filed in the apex court in response to the Mudgal panel report, Srinivasan had sought its permission to resume his duties as president of BCCI, having been told to stay away from the board’s functioning until the issues related to IPL are addressed. However, the court on Monday did not consider this.
In a related development on Monday, former IPL commissioner Lalit Modi disclosed on television that he was financing Aditya Verma, petitioner in the IPL spot-fixing and betting case. In an interview to news channel CNN-IBN, Modi, who now resides in the UK, said, “Yes, I am behind Aditya Verma. He is a strong person."
Verma, who is secretary of unrecognized CAB, had filed the petition last year in the wake of the IPL spot-fixing scandal.
Venkat Ananth and PTI 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!
