File photo of N Srinivasan.
© PTI
After almost 18 months of deliberations on the 2013 Indian Premier League betting and match-fixing scandal, the Supreme Court has barred N. Srinivasan from contesting BCCI elections. The court earlier said Srinivasan's son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan and Raj Kundra of Rajasthan Royals were involved in betting. It also said that Srinivasan was not guilty of cover-up and "charges against him, at best, be regarded as suspicion" and that "BCCI functions are public functions, amenable to judicial law." (Timeline: Complete IPL saga )
The top court has ruled that conflict of interest issues remain and Srinivasan has to choose between his IPL team Chennai Super Kings and the cricket Board. The court has also struck down the controversial 6.2.4 clause that allows BCCI officials to own IPL teams and have commercial interests. The court has also constituted a three-member panel to decide the fate of Chennai Super Kings, Rajasthan Royals and recommend changes in the BCCI constitution. The panel will give its report in six months.
Srinivasan is seeking a re-election as BCCI president. The elections have to be held within six weeks of Thursday's order. In the wake of the IPL probe, Srinivasan was stood down last year by the top court from his position as Board chief. The BCCI has already postponed its Annual General Meeting and elections twice. As per its constitution, the AGM should have been held by September 30 last year. Srinivasan is seeking another term, this time as a candidate backed by the BCCI's East Zone units.
The Supreme Court-appointed probe committee, led by Justice Mukul Mudgal, had in its first report indicted Meiyappan of betting and sharing team information. Srinivasan had mentioned that Gurunath was a mere 'cricket enthusiast.' Srinivasan was earlier charged with conflict of interest and not taking adequate action against involved in 'misdemeanours.' (Top 10 developments )
The case dates back to June 2013 when Aditya Verma, secretary of the Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB), raised charges of a conflict of interest in the BCCI's original two-member inquiry panel for the IPL corruption issue.
A Bombay High Court ruling later termed the probe panel "illegal". The BCCI and the CAB filed petitions in the Supreme Court against this order, with the CAB contending that the Bombay High Court could have suggested a fresh mechanism to look into the corruption allegations. (Supreme Court's top-10 observations in the IPL spot-fixing case )
The Supreme Court then appointed a three-member committee, headed by former High Court judge Mukul Mudgal and comprising additional solicitor general L Nageswara Rao and Nilay Dutta to conduct an independent inquiry into the allegations of corruption against Srinivasan's son-in-law and Chennai Super Kings official Gurunath Meiyappan, India Cements, and Rajasthan Royals team owner Raj Kundra, as well as with the larger mandate of allegations around betting and spot-fixing in IPL matches and the involvement of players.
(With inputs from A. Vaidyanathan)
0 comments:
Post a Comment