MS Dhoni cleared as BCCI Ethics Officer dismisses conflict of interest complaint

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) Ethics Officer, Justice Arun Mishra (retd), has dismissed a complaint filed against former India captain MS Dhoni over alleged violations of conflict-of-interest provisions.

The ruling concluded that no case of conflict of interest was established regarding Dhoni’s participation in the Indian Premier League (IPL).

Advertisement

The complaint, filed in February 2024, alleged that Dhoni, as a “current player,” was simultaneously the “owner of a cricket academy,” thereby violating Rule 38(4)(a) and Rule 38(4)(p) of the BCCI regulations. The complainant also accused Dhoni of failing to fulfil mandatory disclosure obligations under Rules 38(2) and 38(5) after the conflict-of-interest rules were amended in 2018.

Dhoni currently plays for the Chennai Super Kings in the IPL and has led the franchise to five titles.

In his detailed order, Justice Mishra observed that Dhoni could be considered the owner of cricket academies opened by M/s Aarka Sports and Management Private Limited. However, the agreement related to the academies was signed in 2017, before the BCCI’s conflict-of-interest regulations came into force in September 2018.

“Resultantly, Shri MS Dhoni can be said to be the owner of the cricket academies opened by M/s Aarka Sports and Management Private Limited. However, the agreement was entered into in 2017, whereas regulations came into force in September 2018. On facts, Conflict of Interest at the relevant time when Shri MS Dhoni represented India as Captain/Player has not been made out,” the order stated.

Justice Mishra further noted that there was no evidence suggesting Dhoni held any “institutional control or decision-making authority,” nor were there any instances of “favouritism, bias, or preferential treatment.”

“The complainant cannot, in effect, espouse the cause of a third party in this adjudicatory forum. More so, the complainant has personal axe to grind as the respondent had caused loss to him,” the order said.

It also noted that the complaint appeared to arise from a commercial dispute and was filed belatedly.

“In view of the foregoing discussion and findings, the complaint is dismissed,” the order added.