Srinivasan v Thakur highlights divide in BCCI

ICC chairman N Srinivasan's petition seeking prosecution of BCCI secretary Anurag Thakur on perjury charges - a case the Supreme Court is to take up on October 5 - will bring the deep and bitter divisions within the board out in the open. For Srinivasan's defence includes an affidavit from BCCI treasurer Anirudh Chaudhry, effectively pitting the board's two senior-most officials against each other.

The allegations may appear minor but for two senior BCCI officials to publicly contradict each other - the preferred method usually is negotiations behind the scenes - is rare.

The affidavits of Thakur and Chaudhry, accessed by ESPNcricinfo, present conflicting versions of the working committee meeting on August 28 that was adjourned owing to questions over the legality of Srinivasan's presence there.

While Thakur's affidavit was part of the BCCI's application to the Supreme Court seeking clarification on whether Srinivasan could be allowed to attend its meetings, Chaudhry, "requested by Shri N Srinivasan to give an accurate account of the meeting," sought to buttress Srinivasan's claims.

Here are the specific allegations and the counters:

Chaudhry's statement: "the members assembled for the working committee meeting of the BCCI a little before 4pm which was the time scheduled for the said meeting. The members thus assembled included Shri N Srinivasan. Almost all the members were present in and around the said Ball Room waiting for the meeting to begin."

Chaudhry: "no one present in the meeting had raised any objection in the meeting to the presence of Shri N Srinivasan in the meeting, including the office bearers."

Another point made by Thakur - that "N Srinivasan controls the [India Cements Shareholders] Trust" - was later revised after the BCCI admitted to a factual error after finding out that the affidavit had named another person on the trust also going by the name of N Srinivasan.

Srinivasan, in his petition on Wednesday, had alleged that Thakur had furnished false evidence. He also called a "blatant lie" the BCCI's contention that the amendment to clause 6.2.4 of the board's constitution, which allowed board members to have a commercial interest in the IPL and the Champions League T20, was made to accommodate Srinivasan's interest in Chennai Super Kings.

Apart from Chaudhry, BCCI vice-president TC Mathew and Jayesh George, joint secretary, Kerala Cricket Association submitted affidavits in support of Srinivasan's claim.