Top
Millennium Post

Srini-Bindra in blame game, SC to examine BCCI amendment

Srini-Bindra in blame game, SC to examine BCCI amendment
The apex court termed the issue of conflict of interest “relevant” and decided to scrutinse the controversial amendments amidst blame game by top cricket administrator, N Srinivasan and I S Bindra over its introduction in the BCCI rules. “BCCI has to defend the amendment,” a bench comprising justices T S Thakur and F M I Kalifulla said.

Before the bench decided to examine amendment 6.2.4 brought by the BCCI in February 2008 that excluded IPL and Champions League from the purview of conflict of interest and enabled its office bearers to own and promote teams for two events, Bindra said “this is the heart of the problem” and “because of this greed has come into the game”. “The conflict of interest is involved since 2008 which has created the mess. The game of cricket is going to dogs,” Bindra’s counsel Rajiv Dhavan said.

However, during his submission, he was interrupted by Srinivasan’s counsel Kapil Sibal, who said, “It was Bindra who had confirmed the minutes of the meeting on amendment and on Monday five years after he is raising it here”.

When Sibal said that the issue of conflict of interest, vis-a-vis the amendment was not under challenge, the bench said the Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB), through its Secretary, Aditya Verma has challenged the relaxation in the BCCI rules. CAB had earlier raised the issue of conflict of interest against Srinivasan, alleging that he is the Managing Director of the company, Indian Cements Ltd, which owns the Chennai Super Kings (CSK) in the IPL. While Dhavan was making submissions, the bench said “there are two options, either this court examines the amendment itself or this court does not go into it and leaves it to a committee to examine whether sports body can have this type of provisions or not and give suggestions”.

The bench said it has to be examined whether in priciple or ethically or morally such type of provision can be permitted or not. The day’s hearing also saw the bench questioning the IPL chief operating officer (COO) Sunder Raman for not taking action on receiving information that Srinivasan’s son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan and Rajasthan Royal’s Raj Kundra were in touch with actor Vindu Dara Singh who was allegedly acting as a contact of bookies in connection with the IPL 6 spot-fixing and betting scandal.

“You did not think it fit of talking to somebody in BCCI on receiving information of betting and allegation against two individuals. As silent spectator you are watching the fun involving celebrities. What will you do when son-in-law of BCCI President is indulging in illegal activity like betting. You have to rise above everything on the ocassion. You have done nothing. You should have informed that Meiyappan was indulging in betting,” the bench observed.
Next Story
Share it