Lalit Modi moves Supreme Court for stay of BCCI disciplinary proceedings

Lalit Modi on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court seeking an interim stay on the disciplinary proceedings pending against him before the Board of Control for Cricket in India.

In his appeal against the Bombay High Court judgment dated July 15 dismissing his petition, Mr. Modi said the BCCI had launched prosecution against him on the basis of media reports and also on complaints from rank outsiders and meddlesome interlopers, who were neither members of the Board nor an administrator.

He maintained that there should be free and fair enquiry in all the allegations including the allegations against the BCCI Secretary N. Srinivasan for conflict of interest for owning a franchise (Chennai Super Kings) through a company of which he was the promoter while being the office-bearer of the Board.

Mr. Modi said one of the charges against him was that he held a proxy stake in one of the franchises.

He had challenged his suspension and the reference of completely motivated and baseless allegations to a Disciplinary Committee comprising Chirayu Amin, Arun Jaitley and Jyotir Aditya Scindia, who had a personal bias/animus against him.

The petitioner therefore sought an independent Tribunal consisting of one or more retired judges of the Supreme Court be constituted to examine the allegations against him. Despite the grave allegations, the High court had summarily dismissed his petition.

Assailing the judgment, Mr. Modi said refusal to consider his plea at the initial stage would result in serious prejudice and there was no justification for rejecting the reliefs sought.

The manner in which the affairs of the country's premier sports board was being administered in the hands of Mr. Srinivasan was a serious issue which the court had simply ignored, though it was Mr. Srinivasan who had orchestrated his suspension.

He said action was taken against him with mala fie intentions. Arbitrariness and unfairness were writ large on the face thereof, he said and prayed for quashing the impugned judgment and an interim stay of its operation.