Setback For Sharad Pawar's Grandson, Bombay High Court Stays Elections Of Maharashtra Cricket Association Amid 'Nepotism' Allegations

Amid the political 'slugfest' between the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar Faction) (NCP-SP), Bombay High Court on Monday (January 5) stayed the proposed elections of the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA), which were scheduled to take place on January 6 till further orders. 

A division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad opined that it was 'necessary' for the court to intervene in the election process of the MCA, which is marred by controversy of 'nepotism' and 'favouritism.'

"After hearing the counsels and perusing the material on record, we have formed an opinion that interference by this Court with the election process published on the website of the Maharashtra Cricket Association on December 23, 2025 is necessary. Therefore, we issue a direction to the Electoral Officer, MCA not to proceed with the election of the Maharashtra Cricket Association scheduled on January 6, 2026, in any manner whatsoever, without leave of the Court or till the next date of hearing," the judges ordered.

This comes after BJP leader and former Indian cricketer Kedar Jadhav petitioned the bench seeking urgent reliefs against the scheduled elections citing the sudden addition of nearly 401 members to the voter list of the MCA. Some of the newly inducted members, according to Jadhav, were close relatives of NCP-SP MLA and Sharad Pawar's grandnephew Rohit Pawar. The close relatives included even the names of Rohit's wife Kuntee Pawar and NCP-SP MP Supriya Sule's daughter's name. The former cricketer alleged that the new members also included people related to Rohit Pawar either politically or through business, and also several of them were active members of the NCP-SP party.

This was being done to ensure the 'total control' of one family on the MCA, Jadhav alleged. 

Further, Jadhav pointed out that the 'haste' in which elections were declared, new members were inducted etc, flouted the ruling of the Supreme Court which had underlined the need of 'transparency and accountability' in such cricket associations. He argued that the recommendations of the 'Lodha Committee' were being thrown to the wind while inducting new voters or life members and increasing the membership from 150 to 600.

However, the MCA through senior counsel Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi refuted the allegations of favouritism or breach of SC ruling or the recommendations of the Lodha Committee. He contended that everything was being done within the four corners of the law and that the new members were inducted legally through a committee led by a former High Court Judge. 

The bench, however, after hearing a battery of senior lawyers appearing for MCA, Jadhav, Latur Cricket Association and also a Pune-based College stayed the proposed elections, while observing that the MCA by inducting the new life members without giving an opportunity to the other members to object to the same, has deprived the existing members an opportunity to even contest the elections. 

"The preparation of voters list is an integral part of the election process. The purity of election is maintained not only by showing compliance of the rules but there must be real opportunity to all the stakeholders to raise their objection. We are also of the prima-facie opinion that there was no sufficient opportunity to the petitioners to raise their objections to admission of such large number of members and their inclusion in the voters list," the judges held. 

The bench noted from the previous trends that the total number of voters had decreased from the elections held in 2019.

"This may not be a measure to assume that the total number of members must keep on decreasing, but then, admission of about 400 new members would certainly change the whole complexion and to a certain extent the Constitution of the MCA in certain aspects. The proceedings of the AGM indicate that the proposals were approved by showing off hands. This is also a matter of record that there was no clear agenda for approving the admission of new members. This is not in the public interest that the High Court or for that matter any Court should permit the legal wrangle to continue unabated. In our opinion, the balance of convenience lies in favour of the petitioners and no prejudice shall be caused to the MCA, if the elections scheduled on 6th January 2026 are stopped. On the other hand, the petitioners would suffer irreparable loss if the elections are permitted to be conducted on the scheduled date and mere availability of alternate statutory remedy to them shall not suffice. This is not a rule of universal application that aggrieved party shall have remedy only in filing the Election Petition once the election process has been initiated," the judges stated in the order. 

A directive is further issued to all the parties to file their affidavit-in-reply by February 3 and the matter is now fixed for hearing on February 4. 

Appearance:

Senior Advocate Vineet Naik along with Advocates Sukand Kulkarni and Sandeep Salunkhe appeared for Kedar Jadhav.

Senior Advocate Vishwajeet Sawant along with Advocate Sandeep Salunkhe appeared for Latur Cricket Association. 

Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond along with Advocates Rohan Kelkar and Sandeep Salunkhe, appeared for One Life Member of MCA.

Advocates Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud, Janay Jain, Vinayak Chitale and Srishti Magdum instructed by Parinam Law Associates appeared for a Pune College.

Senior Advocates Huzefa Ahmadi and Mustafa Doctor along with Advocates Amjith Anandan, Dewang Mhatre and Rohan Kaiche represented the Electoral Officer of MCA.

Senior Advocates Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Sharan Jagtiani along with Advocates Dixita Gohil, Yash Vijay, Pranjal Agarwal, Shweta Surana, Jatin Patil and Shikhar Agarwal instructed by Gohil Agarwal Law Chambers represented the Maharashtra Cricket Association and its CEO.

Government Pleader Neha Bhide assisted by Additional Government Pleader Kavita N. Solunke and Assistant Government Pleader GR Raghuvanshi represented the State. 

Case Title: Kedar Mahadeo Jadhav vs Electoral Officer (Writ Petition No 43 of 2026)

Click Here To Read/Download Operative Part Of Order (Passed on Monday)

Click Here To Read/Download Detailed Interim Order