IPL Betting Case: Madras High Court Orders Trial In MS Dhoni's Decade-Old Defamation Suit, Advocate Commissioner To Record His Evidence
The Madras High Court has ordered commencement of trial in a defamation suit filed by cricketer Mahendra Singh Dhoni in 2014, seeking permanent injunction against media companies, restraining them and their parties from publishing defamatory content against Dhoni in connection with the 2013 IPL betting scandal. Justice CV Karthikeyan also appointed an Advocate Commissioner to...
The Madras High Court has ordered commencement of trial in a defamation suit filed by cricketer Mahendra Singh Dhoni in 2014, seeking permanent injunction against media companies, restraining them and their parties from publishing defamatory content against Dhoni in connection with the 2013 IPL betting scandal.
Justice CV Karthikeyan also appointed an Advocate Commissioner to record Dhoni's evidence at an agreeable place from October 20 to December 10, as his presence in the court for the chief examination may lead to chaos. Dhoni's counsel assured the court that he would extend full cooperation to the process.
Dhoni had filed the defamation suit in 2014 against Zee Media Corporation, Sudhir Chaudhary- Editor & Business Head of Zee News, IPS Officer G Sampath Kumar, and News Nation Network Pvt Ltd. He had also sought damages of Rs. 100 Crore.
In September 2021, the High Court framed the following issues for the consideration of the suit:
1) Whether the news items published on the plaintiff [Dhoni] by the 2nd defendant's [Sudhir Chaudhary's] news channel are based on any proof materials?
2) Whether there is proven malafide on the part of the 2nd defendant in publishing the news items about the plaintiff?
3) Have the Defendants deliberately carried out a defamation campaign against the Plaintiff?
4) Have the actions of the Defendants caused mental agony and suffering to the plaintiff?
5) Whether the news channel is entitled to publish news reports or articles other than exact judicial order on an allegation?
6) Whether the 2nd defendant's news channel is legally barred from publishing news reports or articles during pendency of legal proceedings?
7) Whether any freedom of speech was involved in the second defendant making the statements, which are questioned in the suit?
8) Whether any statement made by the second defendant constitutes any act of defamation?
9) To what relief is the Plaintiff entitled?
While the suit was pending, Dhoni had also approached the court seeking leave to deliver interrogatories to Zee to answer. This application was allowed by a single judge. Though Zee moved an appeal against the order of the single judge, it was dismissed by a division bench.
Interrogatories are covered under Section 30 and Order XI, Rules 1 to 11, 21, and 22 of the CPC. They are formal written questions that are administered by the parties to the opposite party with the leave of the Court. The objective is that parties disclose their case and ascertain the truth in a fair manner.
Meanwhile, Dhoni had also moved a contempt petition against IPS Officer Sampath Kumar for the statements made by him in an additional affidavit filed in the suit. Dhoni had claimed that the officer made disparaging and derogatory remarks against the Supreme Court and the Madras High Court, which is capable of shaking the faith of the common man in the judicial system and thus constitutes criminal contempt.
In December 2023, a division bench of the High Court sentenced the IPS officer to 15 days' imprisonment in the contempt plea. The sentence was, however, suspended, allowing the officer to file an appeal.
Case Title: Mahendra Singh Dhoni v. Zee Media Corporation Limited
Case No: CS 185 of 2014