The plea sought initiation of suo motu proceedings for criminal contempt against the BCCI office-bearers for making direct and indirect attacks on the judges of Supreme Court and the institution of the courts.
"That calling the Justice Lodha Committee as bogus and terming the recommendations as unconstitutional, illegal and null and void are acts which are in defiance of the judgment passed by this Court. The other statements made by the Contemnor no. 3 (Justice Katju) are clearly libelous," the plea filed through CAB secretary Aditya Verma said.
It said the acts of the Contemnors are deliberate, malicious and for oblique motives aimed at subverting the course of justice, tending to lower the dignity of apex court and stalling the implementation of the July 18 judgment regarding implementation of structral reforms as recommended by Justice Lodha led panel in BCCI.
"BCCI is under a constitutional mandate to act in a just and fair manner and it discharges public function. The ICC is a global governing body for International cricket of which BCCI is a full-time member," the plea said.
The plea further said the contemnors, who are obviously
unhappy with the judgment, have come with a ploy to openly denigrate the judges who had passed the judgment and also the Justice Lodha Committee with a view to stonewall the implementation of the judgment.
"As a strategy, almost on a daily basis statements are being made in the electronic and print media which are not innocent criticism of the judgment passed by this Court but an elaborate vilification campaign undertaken through the powerful tool of the Media with a view to drum up public opinion that the judiciary of the country is transgressing its limits. The apparent effort seems to be to browbeat the judiciary," the plea said.
The plea further said that Thakur and Shirke appointed Justice Katju to head the legal office of the BCCI ostensibly to advise it on the judgment passed by the apex court.
It said the most serious comments which are contemptuous have been made by Justice Katju on his Facebook page on August 8 and the comments made therein are "insidious and a clear attempt at browbeating the judiciary into having a rehearing of the case by changing the constitution of the Bench".
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
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
