"How Are You Prejudiced?": Madras HC Rejects Former IPS' Plea Against Advocate Commissioner Recording Dhoni's Evidence In Defamation Case

The Madras High Court on Monday dismissed an appeal filed by retired IPS Officer G Sampath Kumar, challenging an order of the court appointing an advocate commissioner for recording the evidence of cricketer MS Dhoni in connection with a defamation suit filed by him against the former. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq remarked that Dhoni is a national-level cricketer and his presence in the court during trial might create security issues and may cause inconvenience to the court proceedings. The court also wondered how appointing an advocate commissioner for ensuring expeditious trial, would prejudice Kumar. "Court appointed a commissioner to record evidence. What is your problem? In what way are you prejudiced? He is a national level cricket player. If we insist him to come to court, a lot of arrangements have to be made. What is this? Anyway you have to conduct the case on merits," the court orally remarked. The court also noted that the advocate commissioner had to record the evidence in Kumar or his counsel's presence and he would also be given all opportunity to cross-examine and defend the case in the manner known to law. Thus, noting that there was no procedural irregularity and noting that Kumar would not be prejudiced by the order, the court dismissed his appeal."Admittedly, the 1st respondent (Dhoni) is a cricketer and a celebrity. His physical presence in the court if made compulsory, arrangements would have to be made and it would be difficult for the court. Therefore, the court thought it fit to appoint an advocate commissioner. The appointment would not cause any inconvenience to the party. Advocate commissioner has to record evidence in the presence of the appellant or his counsel. Appellant would be provided all opportunity to cross examine and defend the case in the manner known to law. The exercise of teh trial court is in consonance with the procedure established and there is no inconvenience. The appeal is dismissed. The trial court is requested to expedite the trial," the court recorded in its order. The case pertains to a 100 crore defamation suit filed by Dhoni in 2014 against Zee Media Corporation, Sudhir Chaudhary- Editor & Business Head of Zee News, IPS Officer G Sampath Kumar, and News Nation Network Pvt Ltd for allegedly linking him with the IPL betting scandal. In August 2025, the court had ordered the commencement of the trial and appointed an advocate commissioner for recording Dhoni's evidence. This order was now challenged by Kumar.It may be noted that Kumar had also filed an application seeking to reject the suit filed by Dhoni. He had argued that he was an honest police officer and had merely performed his duty. He submitted that he had already been exonerated in the departmental proceeding and that the allegations against him are motivated.Noting that the contentions raised by Kumar could be raised at the time of trial, the single judge had dismissed his application to reject the plaint. Though an appeal was filed, it was recently dismissed by the court. Counsel for Appellant: Mr RC Paul Kanagaraj, T Karthikeyan, R RameshCase Title: G Sampathkumar IPS v. Mahendra Singh Dhoni and OthersCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 399Case No: OSA 337 of 2025

"How Are You Prejudiced?": Madras HC Rejects Former IPS' Plea Against Advocate Commissioner Recording Dhoni's Evidence In Defamation Case

Upasana Sajeev

Tags