‘Frivolous’: Bombay HC imposes Rs 1 lakh cost on Lalit Modi for plea seeking BCCI pay Rs 10.65 crore penalty on his behalf

Probing alleged FEMA violations in the transfer of Rs 243 crore out of India for hosting IPL in South Africa, the Enforcement Directorate had imposed a penalty of Rs 121.56 crore against Lalit Modi and others in 2018.

Bombay High Court imposed a Rs 1 lakh cost on former Indian Premier League (IPL) commissioner Lalit Modi for filing a “wholly misconceived” plea. (Facebook)

The Bombay High Court on Thursday imposed a Rs 1 lakh cost on former Indian Premier League (IPL) commissioner Lalit Modi for filing a “wholly misconceived” plea seeking direction to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to pay or deposit on his behalf a Rs 10.65 crore penalty for violating the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA).

A bench of Justices Mahesh S Sonak and Jitendra S Jain in its order observed that the plea was “frivolous” and required to be dismissed, with costs payable to Tata Memorial Hospital in the city.

The petitioner through advocate Mohit Goyal had sought ex-parte direction from BCCI to pay to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) the penalty imposed on him by the adjudicating authority. He sought relief against the BCCI on the ground that the by-laws required the BCCI to indemnify the petitioner.

In May 2018, probing alleged FEMA violations in transfer of Rs 243 crore out of India for hosting IPL’s 2009 edition in South Africa, the ED had imposed a total penalty of Rs 121.56 crore against Lalit Modi and others. While imposing the penalty, the adjudicating authority had held that the transfer of funds was in violation of RBI guidelines. Lalit Modi was asked to pay Rs 10.65 crore penalty along with Rs 82.66 crore by BCCI and Rs 11.53 crore by former BCCI president N Srinivasan, among others.

The high court bench noted that in a Zee Telefilms case, the Supreme Court had held that BCCI was not a ‘state’ as per Article 12 of the Constitution, therefore the plea and the reliefs sought against it are not maintainable.

“Though the above decision was delivered in 2005, this petition was instituted in 2018, pleading that the Supreme Court and this Court have consistently held that the BCCI is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 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,” the high court observed while dismissing the present plea.

Omkar Gokhale

Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions. Expertise & Authority Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage. Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in: Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include: Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes). Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty). Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict. Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability. Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges. Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Tags:
Mumbai