Fighting a legal battle against BCCI which held him guilty of corruption and spot-fixing, former India cricketer S Sreesanth got partial relief from the Supreme Court which upheld his guilt but set aside the life ban and directed the board to decide afresh on the quantum of punishment. A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and K M Joseph said cricket is a synonym for gentlemanliness which means discipline, fair play and high standard of morality and there should be zero tolerance towards foul play in the game. It rejected the plea of the bowler who contended that BCCI’s disciplinary committee findings against him were wrong and he should be given a clean chit as he has already been acquitted in a criminal case for spot-fixing.
“The conclusion drawn by the disciplinary committee on the basis of the material cannot be said to be suffering from any infirmity which may warrant judicial review by the constitutional courts. We, thus, are of the opinion that for the decision of the disciplinary committee holding charges under Articles 2.1.1., 2.1.2, 2.1.3 (corruption) and 2.2.3 (Betting) and Article 2.4.1(Receiving gifts) and 2.4.2 (Failing to disclose to BCCI) proved, there are no grounds for this court to take a different view,” the bench said.
The court said acquittal in criminal case would not result in quashing of disciplinary proceedings and findings against him as standard of proof in a disciplinary inquiry and in a criminal case are entirely different. “In a criminal case, it is essential to prove a charge beyond all reasonable doubt wherein in departmental inquiry preponderance of probability is to serve the purpose,” said the court.
“In the disciplinary proceedings held against him under the Anti-Corruption Code of BCCI, the principles of natural justice were not violated. The conclusions drawn by the committee cannot be said to be suffering from any infirmity which may warrant judicial review by the constitutional courts,” it said.
The bench, however, came to the conclusion that BCCI did not consider aggravating and mitigating factors while imposing the harshest punishment of life ban and quashed the decision. The court said the board should decide afresh on quantum of punishment to Sreesanth within three months and also consider mitigating factors like his good previous disciplinary record, the young age etc before coming to any conclusion.
