• Home
  • Blogs
  • Indian Sports Law
  • IPL corruption hearing, Dhoni's alleged spot-fixing involvement, and Hockey India to implement FIH rules

IPL corruption hearing, Dhoni's alleged spot-fixing involvement, and Hockey India to implement FIH rules

Indian Premier League Logo
Thursday, 03 April 2014 By Manali Kulkarni

In this week's Indian Sports Law Blog, Manali Kulkarni reports on the topical legal issues in India sport including: IPL corruption case hearing; Srinivasan position at as the ICC chairman position; MS Dhoni faces accusations for involvement in IPL spot-fixing case; doping in Indian horseracing; and, Hockey India to implement FIH rules and address Harbir Singh Sandhu's case.


IPL Corruption Case Hearing: Supreme Court appoints Gavaskar, while neither the IPL nor its teams are suspended

On Friday, March 28, 2014, the Supreme Court reached a decision on the IPL corruption case, according to an ESPN CricInfo article. The Court decided to replace N.

Srinivasan, former BCCI chief, with Sunil Gavaskar, a BCCI commentator and former Indian cricket captain. According to an NDTV Sports article, N. Srinivasan's "position was deemed untenable" after Srinivasan's son-in-law was found guilty for his involvement in last year's IPL spot-fixing case.

Gavaskar will be interim BCCI president, overseeing this year's IPL tournament, and the other projects will be managed by vice-president, Shivlal Yadav. According to an NDTV Sports, Gavaskar has already received a letter from the Cricket Association of Bihar secretary Aditya Verma, questioning the reputation of the current IPL COO, Sundar Raman, because of his alleged involvement in the IPL 2013 betting scandal, and for filing a public interest litigation (PIL) against the original two-member IPL probe committee for being unconstitutional. Gavaskar, nor the BCCI board, has addressed this new case concerning current IPL leadership.

The second part of the IPL case hearing related to the exclusion of the IPL teams, Chennai Super Kings (CSK) and Rajasthan Royals (RR), as well as the possibility of cancelling the entirety of IPL 2014. Both of these teams faced major allegations regarding betting and corruption in IPL 2013's spot-fixing case and were further exposed in the Mudgal IPL Probe Committee Report. The Court has decided not to cancel the IPL this year and will allow all teams to play, including CSK and RR. However, the Court has directed N. Srinivasan's Indian Cements', who owned CSK, employees to have "no role in the BCCI except as players or commentators."

According to a Financial Express article, if the Supreme Court had canceled IPL 2014, Multi Screen Media (MSM), which is the "host broadcaster for IPL" would have lost approximately Rs 1000 crore (100m in GBP) in "advertising revenue", while the BCCI itself would have lost Rs 150 crore (15m in GBP).

The Supreme Court explained that "it would reserve its final judgement till all hearings are complete." The next hearing is scheduled for April 16, 2014 when the BCCI's counsel will present its arguments. (See previous blog for details on the IPL Corruption Case).

Source articles:




To continue reading or watching login or register here

Already a member? Sign in

Get access to all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport including articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts.  Find out more here.

Related Articles

Written by

Manali Kulkarni

Manali Kulkarni

Manali is currently a fourth year JD Candidate at the University of Maine School of Law. She was the COO at LawInSport and continues to be an executive contributor of the editorial board for LawInSport. She holds an LLM in Sports Law from Nottingham Law School (Nottingham Trent University). She is currently the legal extern for the Professional Collegiate League, and also serves as an intern for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. 

  • This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.


Legal Advisors

Copyright © LawInSport Limited 2010 - 2022. These pages contain general information only. Nothing in these pages constitutes legal advice. You should consult a suitably qualified lawyer on any specific legal problem or matter. The information provided here was accurate as of the day it was posted; however, the law may have changed since that date. This information is not intended to be, and should not be used as, a substitute for taking legal advice in any specific situation. LawInSport is not responsible for any actions taken or not taken on the basis of this information. Please refer to the full terms and conditions on our website.