The Supreme Court on Monday allowed former IPL chairman Lalit Modi to pursue civil remedies against BCCI for payment of penalty under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) to the tune of over ₹10 crore.
₹10 crore. (HT)” title=”Former IPL chairman Lalit Modi to pursue civil remedies against BCCI for payment of penalty under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) to the tune of over ₹10 crore. (HT)” />The order was passed by a bench of justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan on a petition filed by Modi against a Bombay high court decision of Dec 19, 2024 refusing to entertain his writ petition holding that a writ petition is not maintainable against BCCI.
The bench said, “BCCI has been held to be ‘state’ for functional purposes related to cricket. For recoveries, it cannot be equivalent to state.”
The penalty was imposed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against BCCI, Modi and other office bearers alleging FEMA violation in the remittances made by BCCI for staging the 2009 IPL season in South Africa. An amount of ₹10.65 crore was imposed on Modi while varying amounts were imposed against other office bearers. BCCI was slapped with penalty of over ₹82 crore. At the relevant time, Modi was the IPL chairman and BCCI vice-president.
Modi’s lawyer, advocate Vikas Mehta submitted that this was a case of discrimination by BCCI which had indemnified the penalty against BCCI secretary N Srinivasan and treasurer MP Pandove, while refusing him the same benefit.
“Why have they denied it to you. Is it personal,” the bench asked Mehta to which he replied, “Yes. It is personal.” In his petition, Modi said, “The petitioner is aggrieved by decision of respondent (BCCI) in as much as the respondent has acted in a discriminatory manner by indemnifying N Srinivasan and MP Pandove against the penalty imposed on them vide order dated August 31, 2018 of the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).”
Mehta cited Rule 34 of the Rules and Regulations to Memorandum of Association of BCCI under which the Board is under an obligation to indemnify the office bearers out of the board’s funds against all losses and expenses incurred by them during the discharge of their official duty.
He pointed out that the decision to shift the IPL matches to South Africa was a “collective” decision of BCCI and Modi was discharging his official duties as BCCI vice-president and IPL chairman. “It is pertinent to note that the said decisions were unanimous and no decision was made by the petitioner in his personal capacity,” the petition filed by Mehta said.
The HC order had dismissed Modi’s petition with a cost of ₹1 lakh. It said, “In matters of alleged indemnification of the petitioner in the context of penalties imposed upon the petitioner by the ED, there is no question of discharge of any public function, and therefore, for this purpose, no writ could be issued to the BCCI.”
Mehta paid the cost levied on him but challenged the finding against BCCI. The top court allowed Mehta’s request to pursue civil remedies by filing a suit. The order said, “The counsel for petitioner has fairly stated that even if petitioner under Article 226 is not maintainable, the petitioner will be entitled to avail civil remedies as per law. Recording this statement, the petition is disposed.”
Modi was suspended from BCCI on April 26, 2010. He served as vice-president of BCCI from 2005 to 2010 and chairman of the IPL from 2007 to 2010.
