The arguments that didn't work for Gurunath
The arguments presented by Gurunath Meiyappan's legal team asking for leniency, which were not accepted by the Supreme Court
No. | Argument | Counter argument by the Lodha Panel |
1 | He suffered imprisonment from 26th May 2013 to 4th June 2013 | His judicial custody for a period of 10 days shows the seriousness of the misconduct committed by him |
2 | He is facing criminal charges before the magistrate on the same allegations | The fact that he is facing criminal charges shows the seriousness of the misconduct committed by him |
3 | This is his first offence with unblemished antecedents in the six previous IPL seasons | His habit of regularly placing bets in IPL matches renders the argument of him being a first offender and having unblemished antecedents of no worth |
4 | He did not gain from betting, but in fact lost 60 lakh rupees | The huge losses show that he engaged himself in heavy bets. It is his back luck that he did not make any money |
5 | He is involved in charitable work of the family company AVM group | Charitable work, if any, by the family business is hardly a mitigating factor |
6 | Cooperated with the Mudgal Committee as well as the police investigation team | There is nothing to indicate that his participation was voluntary. On the other hand, he is guilty of not reporting exchanges with a known bookie |
7 | He is young (40 years of age) with a passion for the game | Being 40 years of age, he is not young but middle aged. Any person who has a passion for the game would not be involved in betting |
8 | The vast media coverage resulted in untold mental agony to him and his family | Any agony suffered by him because of media coverage is too small in comparison to the huge injury caused to the reputation and image of the game, IPL and BCCI |
9 | He has been suspended from 26 May 2013 | The period of suspension already undergone is hardly a mitigating factor |