The Delhi High Court on Wednesday, January 21, refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that called for Bangladesh to be barred from international cricket in India. The court stated that such matters relate to foreign policy and international relations, which fall outside the scope of judicial intervention.
Bangladesh have refused to travel to India, citing security concerns after fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman was excluded from the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) at the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s direction. The situation has been further affected by rising diplomatic tensions between the two countries.
Bangladesh asked for their matches to be shifted to Sri Lanka, but the International Cricket Council rejected the request.
Your daily dose of cricket!
Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Ban on Bangladesh from International Cricket
The Delhi High Court refused to hear a Public Interest Litigation seeking a ban on Bangladesh from international cricket over alleged violence against the Hindu community.
A bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that such demands involve foreign policy and international relations, which fall under the executive’s authority, not the courts, and criticized the petitioner for filing a frivolous plea before allowing it to be withdrawn.
“What kind of petition is this? You are asking the court to take a policy decision in respect of foreign affairs. Let it be left to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. You are asking us to conduct some inquiry in Bangladesh? Our writ will go there?” the bench said today.
Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits of Jurisdiction, Warns Against Misuse of PILs
The court made it clear that its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution do not apply to foreign governments or overseas organizations. It said that Indian courts cannot issue directions to bodies outside the country.
The bench pointed out that the petition sought action against the International Cricket Council, along with the Bangladesh and Sri Lankan cricket boards. Notably, the court said that it has no authority over these organizations.
The judges also warned the petitioner against misusing the Public Interest Litigation route. They said that such cases waste valuable court time and added that heavy costs could be imposed for filing frivolous petitions.
Delhi High Court Courts Cannot Issue Directions to Foreign Cricket Boards
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared on behalf of the Board of Control for Cricket in India and pointed out that the Bangladesh and Sri Lankan cricket boards had also been named in the case.
The court repeatedly told the petitioner, a self-identified law student, that Indian courts cannot issue writs to foreign cricket boards or instruct the Government of India on how to deal with another country.
Chief Justice stated that Public Interest Litigation cannot be based on assumptions or personal views without legal backing. The bench also dismissed the petitioner’s reliance on a Pakistani court ruling, stating that Indian constitutional courts do not follow Pakistani judgments.
After facing continued objections on the petition’s maintainability, the petitioner asked to withdraw the PIL. The court allowed the withdrawal and advised the petitioner to pursue more meaningful work.
