38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, February 22, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
CelebStreet

Hardik Pandya, KL Rahul Fined Rs 20 Lakh Each By BCCI For 'Koffee With Karan' Remarks [Read Order]

By LawStreet News Network      22 April, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Hardik Pandya, KL Rahul Fined Rs 20 Lakh Each By BCCI For 'Koffee With Karan' Remarks [Read Order]

India cricket team all-rounder Hardik Pandya and opener K.L. Rahul were on April 19, 2019, fined Rs 20 lakh each by the BCCI Ombudsman Justice D.K. Jain for their sexist comments on a popular TV show Koffee with Karan.

In the order, Justice Jain directed the players to pay a fine of Rs 20 lakh each that included a payment of Rs 1 lakh each to each of the most deserving widows of ten constables in para-military forces who have lost their lives while on duty, through Bharat Ke Veer App.

Further, Justice Jain also instructed them to deposit Rs 10 lakh each in the fund created by the Cricket Association for the blind. All payments are to be made within four weeks from the date of the order.

The Supreme Court-appointed Ombudsman had issued notices to Pandya and Rahul in early April to appear for deposition for their controversial comments on the TV show.

The players, who became subjects of nationwide criticism following their remarks on women were provisionally suspended by the Committee of Administrators (COA) before the suspension was lifted pending an inquiry by the Ombudsman.

The controversial episode that was aired on January 6, 2019, triggered outrage among people, an FIR was also filed against Pandya under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. However, the Jodhpur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court on April 5, 2019, granted interim relief to the Indian cricketer by putting a stay on the proceedings.

[Read Order]



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

us-sc-strikes-down-trumps-global-tariffs-rules-ieepa-does-not-authorize-president-to-impose-duties
Trending International
US SC Strikes Down Trump’s Global Tariffs, Rules IEEPA Does Not Authorize President to Impose Duties [Read Order]

US Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s global tariffs, ruling that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose import duties.

21 February, 2026 02:45 PM
kerala-hc-issues-notice-to-cbfc-over-certification-of-the-kerala-story-2-goes-beyond
Trending Judiciary
Kerala HC Issues Notice to CBFC Over Certification of ‘The Kerala Story 2 – Goes Beyond’

Kerala High Court issues notice to CBFC over certification of The Kerala Story 2, questions safeguards under Cinematograph Act; release not stayed.

21 February, 2026 02:50 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-declines-to-entertain-plea-over-alleged-anti-muslim-remarks-by-assam-cm-says-approach-hc
Trending Judiciary
SC Declines to Entertain Plea Over Alleged Anti-Muslim Remarks by Assam CM, Says Approach HC

Supreme Court asks petitioners to approach Gauhati High Court over alleged hate speech by Assam CM, declines plea for FIRs and SIT probe.

16 February, 2026 02:52 PM
can-live-in-partner-be-prosecuted-under-section-498a-ipc-sc-to-decide-scope-of-husband-in-cruelty-law
Trending Judiciary
Can Live-In Partner Be Prosecuted Under Section 498A IPC? SC To Decide Scope Of ‘Husband’ In Cruelty Law [Read Order]

Supreme Court to decide if a man in a live-in relationship can be prosecuted under Section 498A IPC for cruelty. Case to impact scope of “husband”.

16 February, 2026 03:33 PM
sc-sets-aside-anticipatory-bail-granted-to-absconding-murder-accused-in-madhya-pradesh-political-rivalry-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Sets Aside Anticipatory Bail Granted To Absconding Murder Accused In Madhya Pradesh Political Rivalry Case [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court sets aside anticipatory bail to absconding murder accused in MP political rivalry case, calls HC order perverse and unjustified.

16 February, 2026 03:59 PM
places-of-worship-act-does-not-protect-illegal-encroachments-on-government-land-madras-hc
Trending Judiciary
Places of Worship Act Does Not Protect Illegal Encroachments on Government Land: Madras HC [Read Order]

Madras High Court rules that Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not protect temples built on encroached government land; eviction upheld in Ramanathapuram case.

16 February, 2026 04:18 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email