IPL Scam: Tough to Believe There is No Conflict of Interest, Supreme Court Tells N. Srinivasan

In the IPL scam hearing on Monday, the Supreme Court held on to its tough stance against Board of Control for Cricket in India's suspended president N. Srinivasan. Stressing on the issue of conflict of interest, the apex court observed that BCCI were like "the contractor as well as the head of contracting party." (Srinivasan to Supreme Court: Gavaskar, Ganguly, Shastri also had dual roles in BCCI, IPL)

On December 1, the two-member Supreme Court Bench had asked N. Srinivasan to "lift the veil" on the issue of conflict of interest. Srinivasan, who is seeking another term as the head of BCCI, is also the managing director of India Cements, the company that owns Chennai Super Kings. Furthermore, his son-in-law and CSK high-ranking official Gurunath Meiyappan was indicted for betting in IPL 2013.

Srinivasan had said that all allegations against him - as BCCI chief - were false.

The Court proceedings will resume on Tuesday.

The top developments (in ascending order) of the IPL betting and spot-fixing case:

1. The case dates back to June 2013. Aditya Verma, secretary of the Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB), filed a PIL in Bombay High Court raising charges of a conflict of interest in the Board's two-member inquiry panel probing corruption in IPL. The Bombay High Court declared the probe "illegal."

2. The BCCI and the CAB went to the Supreme Court against the Bombay High Court order. Verma's lawyers said the Bombay court could have suggested a fresh mechanism to investigate the charges of corruption.

3. In October 2013, the Supreme Court appointed a three-member committee, headed by former High Court judge Mukul Mudgal. The panel included additional solicitor general L Nageswara Rao and senior advocate Nilay Dutta. The Supreme Court wanted the panel to conduct an independent inquiry into the allegations of corruption against Srinivasan's son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan, India Cements, and Rajasthan Royals team owner Raj Kundra. The team was also asked to probe allegations of betting and spot-fixing in IPL and the involvement of players.

4. On February 10, 2014, the Mudgal Committee submitted two reports to the Supreme court. One submitted jointly by Mudgal and Rao and one by Dutta. They also filed a sealed envelope containing 13 names against whom there were "unsubstantiated" charges of corruption. One of the names was Srinivasan.

5. On March 28, Supreme Court suspends Srinivasan as BCCI president. In its interim order, the court says Srinivasan will be replaced by former cricketers Sunil Gavaskar and Shivlal Yadav. Gavaskar was given charge of IPL affairs while former Test spinner Yadav was entrusted with non-IPL issues.

6. On April 15, Srinivasan files an affidavit saying the Supreme Court should reinstate him as BCCI president. Srinivasan says he is innocent and allegations of conflict of interest were baseless. He also says that he never tried to hide the real identity of Meiyappan, indicted by Mudgal committee for betting and sharing team (Chennai Super Kings) information.

7. In May this year, following the panel's initial report, the Supreme Court gave the Mudgal committee greater powers to investigate the contents of the sealed envelope. Assisted by former senior IPS officer BB Mishra and Mumbai and Chennai police among others, the panel got greater investigative powers for search and seizure of relevant documents. It did not have the power to arrest. The panel was asked to submit a report by August-end. On September 1, the Mudgal panel seeks a two-month extension to complete its probe. The Supreme Court allows the extension.

8. BCCI lawyers wants Srinivasan to be reinstated since the Board AGM was due. The Bench refused saying BCCI AGM was "not its concern." The court also referred to an earlier order by Justice AK Patnaik saying Srinivasan "could not come back as BCCI president as long as the probe is on." BCCI puts off AGM to November 20, clearly indicating that it will wait for Supreme Court's ruling on 'suspended' Srinivasan. In the next Supreme Court hearing, The Bench reveals the names of Srinivasan, Gurunath Meiyappan, Raj Kundra and Sundar Raman for "misdemeanor" in IPL. Serves notices on the four "non-playing" members.

9. On November 17, the apex court says Srinivasan was not involved in spot-fixing or illegal betting and did not attempt to scuttle the probe into corruption in the Indian Premier League. Following this, Srinivasan urges the apex court to reinstate him as BCCI boss.IPL COO Sundar Raman, who was accused of contacting a bookie eight times in a season of the IPL, also files an affidavit in the court. On November 24, however, the apex court slammed Srinivasan for owning an Indian Premier League franchise (Chennai Super Kings) as it raises issues of conflict of interest. The apex court  demanded answers from him regarding his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan. Meiyappan was indicted in betting during IPL. The court also said that Meiyappan's involvement in betting during IPL was as dangerous as 'insider trading.'

10. On December 1, Srinivasan claimed that all allegations against him were false and that he had acted with 'speed' against his son-in-law Meiyappan for his involvement in betting. The apex court said that the onus of disproving charges of 'conflict of interest' was on Srinivasan and his cousel Kapil Sibal in the hearing on December 1.