IPL Spot-fixing: Supreme Court rejects BCCI's four-point action plan against guilty

India's top court of law, on Tuesday, rejected BCCI's four-point action plan to punish perpetrators of Indian Premier League's (IPL) spot-fixing scam and stated that only a completely independent body, with no affiliations of any kind to BCCI, would be able to dispense appropriate punitive measures.

Supreme Court to Srinivasan:

Taking a hard stance, the country's top court asked BCCI to reconstitute their governing body sans N Srinivasan and instructed the reconstituted body to take up the case against Gurunath Meiyappan and other offenders as directed by the findings of the Mudgal committee report.

"We want immediate action against Meiyappan. Best action possible only if you (Srinivasan) stay away from BCCI. We don't want to bypass BCCI and take punitive measures," the top court reportedly told Srinivasan's counsel during the hearing.

The Supreme Court of India has also demanded, in writing, action on the administrative side of BCCI and have given time till 1400 IST, to BCCI, for coming up with solutions concerning Chennai Super Kings (CSK) and Meiyappan.

BCCI presented the Supreme Court with four options for taking action against those found guilty.

1. Independent disciplinary committee that will be set up by BCCI can decide punishment.2. IPL governing council can decide what to do.3. Two independent judges can be appointed to decide on the punishment.4. Mudgal panel itself can take action.

However, the Supreme Court is reported to have rejected all the options presented by Srinivasan's counsel. The court also made it clear that nobody related to BCCI should be involved in the panel deciding punitive actions.

According to Times Now, the highest constitutional court of the country has asked N Srinivasan to choose between the posts of BCCI administrator and IPL owner.

The Supreme Court added that maintaining the "purity" of cricket was utmost important for it and hinted at setting up a high-powered committee to suggest measures for cleansing the game.

"That committee has to be a high-powered committee and that committee will also look into the conflict of interest and its findings will be binding on BCCI," the bench observed.

It added that somebody has to take a call on the punishment on the basis of the Mudgal Committee report but the question was who should be given the task. "We are not very keen to decide on punishment. We want the system to be more effective," the bench said adding "but action has to follow immediately".

Though Justice Mudgal committee has not found anything regarding the "cover-up" by Srinivasan for alleged involvement of his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan in the betting and spot-fixing scandal, the bench said the high powered committee would have to examine various angles and the issue of conflict of interest would be one.

"Conflict of interest issue can be a course correction for future. If committee says there was a conflict of interest in Srinivasan's function, it cannot say punish but suggest for amendments in the rule," it said adding the committee would also look into the aspect of whether a person's involvement in cricket administration while wearing multiple hats amounts to conflict of interest.

The bench said the committee would examine and analyse the aspect of quantum of punishment likely to be inflicted upon persons found guilty of breaching the code of conduct.

"BCCI creates in minds an illusion that the game is fair but the entire nation feels cheated. Is there any remedy as otherwise what will happen to the nation?" it said.

While senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Srinivasan, assured that Srinavasan would keep away from the day-to-day administration of the game on being elected after the upcoming election, the counsel for Cricket Association of Bihar Nalini Chidambraram submitted he should not be allowed to contest at all.

However, the bench said Justice Mudgal Committee has not found anything against Srinivasan and wondered if it would proper to keep him away from contesting election.

"In this background, is Srinivasan not eligible to contest election? On what juristic principle can we stop him at this stage?" The bench observed.

Referring to the issue of conflict of interest, the bench said the high-powered committee can say it can be a basis for disqualification in future. The bench disagreed with Chidambaram's submission that BCCI's administration was being run illegally as the term of office-bearers has ended in September and they are unauthorisedly running the affairs of BCCI as date of election has passed.

Srinivasan's Defence:

Defending himself, N Srinivasan requested the Supreme Court if other actions could be explored while assuring the top court that he would keep away from any enquiry against Gurunath Meiyappan.

Srinivasan also provided a track record of all that his company did for Cricket. "I'm not the kind of man who would destroy cricket. I have ensured that BCCI files tax returns which wasn't done for 25 years. I've ensured that players, even former, who have played at least once, get a one-time benefit," he was quoted as saying.

Srinivasan also admitted to his mistake of attending Tamil Nadu Cricket Association (TNCA) meetings despite having stepped aside as cricket administrator.

The hearing was subsequently adjourned for the day will resume on Wednesday, 10 December.