IPL spot-fixing: Harish Salve appeals for N Srinivasan's BCCI ban; SC adjourns hearing till Nov 27
As the Supreme Court resumed its hearing on Tuesday in connection with the Indian Premier League (IPL) spot-fixing and betting scandal, petitioner's advocate Harish Salve appealed to SC to keep away the ousted BCCI president N Srinivasan from the Indian cricket board under section 6 (of BCCI) for two to five years.
New Delhi: As the Supreme Court resumed its hearing on Tuesday in connection with the Indian Premier League (IPL) spot-fixing and betting scandal, petitioner's advocate Harish Salve appealed to SC to keep away the stepped aside BCCI president N Srinivasan from the Indian cricket board under section 6 (of BCCI) for two to five years.
Salve also pushed for revealing names of the tainted cricketers and want SC to make the full Mudgal report public.
SC said that Srinivasan's son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan's role in IPL betting and spot-fixing scandal seemed like "insider trading" and agreed to hear a plea for making public the names of cricketers, who were mentioned in the Justice Mudgal Committee report.
"If Meiyappan was leaking information and someone else was putting bet then it is like insider trading," a bench of justices T S Thakur and F M I Kalifulla said when it was submitted that Srinivasan's son-in-law was a part of Chennai Super Kings(CSK) and was always with team members at all functions whether it was dug-out or making team strategy.
Bench of justices T S Thakur and F M I Kalifulla also raised questions on why the second report of Mudgal Commiittee was silent on the alleged cover up of Meiyappan by the CSK owner India Cements and Srinivasan which was stated in its first report.
However, no decision has been taken on N Srinivasan as yet.
The hearing has been adjourned till November 27th.
Earlier, on Monday the Supreme Court had lashed at the BCCI, which was a big blow for N Srinivasan's hopes of being reinstated as the BCCI chief. The apex court had asked the ICC boss to come clean on the issue of conflict of interest of being board president and Chennai Super Kings owner simultaneously.
The SC had said that the cash-rich tournament was a mutual beneficial society between BCCI and IPL.
Making some stringent observations over the report submitted by the Mudgal panel, the Supreme Court had told BCCI that the common man's trust has been shaken and it's time to uphold the glory of the game.
The SC had asked BCCI how members who are financially viable had gone on to become team owners in IPL and how that was not a conflict of interest.
The SC had also stated that cricket must be played in its true spirit and should remain a gentleman's game and BCCI allowing things like spot-fixing and betting to happen was killing the game of cricket.
During the proceedings, the BCCI had reiterated the fact that N Srinivasan should be reinstated as the chief since there are no charges against him.
Last week, the BCCI had decided to stand behind N Srinivasan and IPL COO Sundar Raman, after an emergency working committee meeting on November 18.
With the SC clearing Srinivasan of betting and match-fixing charges, the latter had sought the apex body to reinstate him as the BCCI president and to allow CSK to play in the IPL.
The Mudgal Committee, which had submitted its report on November 17 had said that Srinivasan, along with four other BCCI officials, was aware of the violation of the Players Code of Conduct by a player mentioned as 'Individual 3' in Mudgal report, but no action was taken by any of them.
The Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee, had also came out with a severe indictment of IPL CEO Sunder Raman who it said knew of a contact of a bookie and had contacted him eight times in one season but did nothing about it.
Earlier, on 14th November, the SC had disclosed seven names that were probed by the Justice Mudgal Committee.
The big names included that of Srinivasan, his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan, and Rajasthan Royals' co-owner Raj Kundra. Meiyappan had already been indicted following an incident where a Forensic Science Laboratory in Mumbai confirmed his voice samples in a tapped conversation with another accomplice Vindoo Dara Singh.
Names of three active players were inadvertently mentioned initially. However, the honorable court decided to strike off their names considering the sensitivity of the issue and the possible far reaching implications of this disclosure on their career.