Allegations of cover up by Srini does not stand proved: SC

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Jan 22 2015 | 9:50 PM IST
The allegations that some crucial facts were suppressed before the Justice Mukul Mudgal committee may at best "raise a suspicion" against N Srinivasan but the charge of attempted cover up by the BCCI President- in-exile does not stands proved, the Supreme Court today said.
The apex court, which barred Srinivasan from contesting any BCCI election on grounds of conflict of interest, observed that suspicion can hardly be taken as proof to hold him guilty of the charge of alleged cover up.
"Similarly, the allegation that an effort was made to suppress facts before the Mudgal Committee or that Gurunath (Meiyappan) was shown only as a cricket enthusiast whereas he was a team official, may, at best, raise a suspicion against Srinivasan but suspicion can hardly be taken as proof to hold him guilty of the alleged cover up," a bench headed by Justice T S Thakur said.
"We cannot, therefore, with any amount of certainty, say that the charge of attempted cover up levelled against Srinivasan stands proved," the bench, also comprising Justice F M I Kalifulla, said in its 138-page verdict.
The bench also said that appointment of a probe committee comprising former judges of the High Court to enquire into the allegations of betting and spot fixing cannot be seen as an attempt to cover up as there was nothing on record to show that Srinivasan withheld any incriminating material from the panel.
"It is, in our opinion, difficult to hold that the circumstances enumerated by Mrs Chidambaram (counsel appearing for the Cricket Association of Bihar) proved by preponderance of probability the charge of cover up levelled against Srinivasan," the apex court said.
It also noted there is nothing to show that Srinivasan was possessing any incriminating material which was withheld by him and he had, in fact, stepped aside while the probe was on to avoid any accusation being made against him.
"The probe committee has recorded a specific finding that the allegations of match fixing, spot-fixing or betting were not proved against Srinivasan in the course of the enquiry. That finding was not seriously assailed before us, by Mrs Chidambaram, counsel for the appellant association," it said.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jan 22 2015 | 9:50 PM IST

Next Story