Hot Off The PressNews

Supreme Court: Accepting the fresh unconditional apology tendered on 13.07.2017, the Court dropped the contempt charges against the former BCCI President Anurag Thakur. Listing the matter on 24.09.2017, the Court issued notice to the former BCCI President N. Srinivasan and Former Secretary Niranjan Shah for participating in the BCCI Annual General Meeting as a nominee of State Association after the Committee of Administrators brought to the Court’s notice that both were over 70 years of age and were disqualified as per the order dated 02.01.2017.

The bench of T.S. Thakur, former CJ and A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ  had, on 02.01.2017, removed Anurag Thakur, President of BCCI and Ajay Shirke, Secretary, BCCI from their offices and had said that the President and Secretary and office bearers of BCCI have obstructed the implementation of the final directions of this Court on the basis of a specious plea that its State Associations are not willing to abide by the directions.  The Court had, on 07.10.2016, asked Anurag Thakur, President of the BCCI to file a personal affidavit whether he had asked the President of the ICC to state that the appointment of Justice Lodha Committee was tantamount to Government interference in the working of the BCCI. It was noticed that the conduct of the President of BCCI in seeking a letter from the President of ICC in August 2016, after the final judgment and Order dated 18.07.2016, is nothing but an attempt on the part of the head of BCCI to evade complying, with the Order of this Court.

Source: ANI

Hot Off The PressNews

On 13.07.2017, the former BCCI President Anurag Thakur tendered a fresh unconditional apology before the Supreme Court after the Court rejected his earlier affidavit of apology and asked him to file a fresh one-page affidavit. In his affidavit, Anurag Thakur stated that it was never his intention to undermine the majesty of the Supreme Court and unintentionally some kind of misinformation and miscommunication has occured.

The bench of T.S. Thakur, former CJ and A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ  had, on 02.01.2017, removed Anurag Thakur, President of BCCI and Ajay Shirke, Secretary, BCCI from their offices and had said that the President and Secretary and office bearers of BCCI have obstructed the implementation of the final directions of this Court on the basis of a specious plea that its State Associations are not willing to abide by the directions.  The Court had, on 07.10.2016, asked Anurag Thakur, President of the BCCI to file a personal affidavit whether he had asked the President of the ICC to state that the appointment of Justice Lodha Committee was tantamount to Government interference in the working of the BCCI. It was noticed that the conduct of the President of BCCI in seeking a letter from the President of ICC in August 2016, after the final judgment and Order dated 18.07.2016, is nothing but an attempt on the part of the head of BCCI to evade complying, with the Order of this Court.

Source: PTI

Hot Off The PressNews

Supreme Court: Refusing to consider the earlier affidavit of apology filed by the former BCCI President Anurag Thakur, the 3-judge bench of Dipak Misra, A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ asked him to tender fresh unconditional apology.

The bench of T.S. Thakur, former CJ and A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ  had, on 02.01.2017, removed Anurag Thakur, President of BCCI and Ajay Shirke, Secretary, BCCI from their offices and had said that the President and Secretary and office bearers of BCCI have obstructed the implementation of the final directions of this Court on the basis of a specious plea that its State Associations are not willing to abide by the directions.

Source: ANI

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: Directing that Anurag Thakur, President of BCCI and Ajay Shirke, Secretary, BCCI shall forthwith cease and desist from being associated with the working of BCCI, the 3-Judge Bench of T.S. Thakur, CJ and A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ accepted the norms laid down by the Lodha Committee regarding the disqualification of the office bearers of BCCI which said that a person shall be disqualified from being an Office Bearer if he or she :

  • Is not a citizen of India;
  • Has attained the age of 70 years;
  • Is declared to be insolvent, or of unsound mind;
  • Is a Minister or government servant;
  • Holds any office or post in a sports or athletic association or federation apart from cricket;
  • Has been an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative period of 9 years;
  • Has been charged by a Court of Law for having committed any criminal offence.

The Bench said that tough sufficient opportunities have been granted to BCCI to comply with the judgment and order of this Court, it has failed to do so. The President and Secretary and office bearers of BCCI have obstructed the implementation of the final directions of this Court on the basis of a specious plea that its State Associations are not willing to abide by the directions. The Court had earlier, on 07.10.2016, asked Anurag Thakur, President of the BCCI to file a personal affidavit whether he had asked the CEO of the ICC to state that the appointment of Justice Lodha Committee was tantamount to Government interference in the working of the BCCI. It was noticed that the conduct of the President of BCCI in seeking a letter from the President of ICC in August 2016, after the final judgment and Order dated 18.07.2016, is nothing but an attempt on the part of the head of BCCI to evade complying, with the Order of this Court. The Court, hence, issued a show-cause notice to Anurag Thakur to explain why he should not be proceeded against under the provisions of Section 195 read with Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Stating that a Committee of administrators shall supervise the administration of BCCI through its Chief Executive Officer, the Court requested Mr Fali S Nariman, learned Senior Counsel and Mr Gopal Subramaniam, the learned Amicus Curiae to assist the Court in nominating the names of the administrators by suggesting names of persons with integrity and experience in managing a similar enterprise. Till then, the Court directed that the senior most Vice-President of BCCI shall perform the duties of the President, BCCI and the Joint Secretary shall perform the duties of Secretary. The matter was listed to be taken up on 19.01.2017 for nominating the names of the members of the committee of administrators. [BCCI v. Cricket Association of Bihar, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 4, order dated 02.01.2017]