Dhoni’s ₹100-Crore Defamation Suit: Madras High Court Directs Registry to Number Retired IPS Officer’s Pleas
The Madras High Court has directed its Registry to number three applications filed by retired IPS officer G. Sampath Kumar concerning the recording of M.S. Dhoni’s evidence in the cricketer’s ₹100-crore defamation suit. The direction was issued on September 1 by Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi.
The applications had initially been placed before the judge because of questions over their maintainability. Sampath Kumar’s counsel relied on a Supreme Court order in a similar matter and argued that the applications could legally be entertained. After examining the precedent, the High Court permitted the Registry to number them.
Sampath Kumar is seeking safeguards for the recording of Dhoni’s deposition in the long-running civil defamation case. Among his requests is that a judicial officer should monitor the evidence-recording process carried out by the advocate commissioner appointed by the court.
He has also sought complete video recording of Dhoni’s evidence, along with unedited and certified copies of the recording being provided to him and the judicial officer who may be appointed to monitor the proceedings.
A central point in the plea is the location where Dhoni’s evidence will be recorded. Sampath Kumar has asked that it be conducted either on court premises or inside a government building rather than at a private venue. His counsel argued that Dhoni’s status as a prominent cricketer should not mean that evidence is recorded in a five-star hotel or private bungalow.
Dhoni will have an opportunity to file a counter-affidavit after the applications are formally numbered and listed for hearing. The latest order therefore does not grant Sampath Kumar the safeguards he has requested; it allows his applications to move forward for judicial consideration.
The ₹100-crore defamation suit was filed by Dhoni in 2014 against Sampath Kumar and several media entities, including Zee Media Corporation, journalist Sudhir Chaudhary and News Nation Network. The dispute arose from allegations and reporting connecting Dhoni with the 2013 IPL betting controversy. Dhoni has sought ₹100 crore in damages.
Sampath Kumar has maintained that statements attributed to him were made in his official capacity while he was involved in the investigation of the IPL betting controversy. He has argued that he should not be held liable for defamation over evidence given before the Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee, which was constituted to investigate the scandal.
The trial is already at the evidence stage. In August 2025, the Madras High Court ordered the commencement of the trial and appointed advocate G. Jayasri as a court-appointed commissioner to record Dhoni’s evidence.
Sampath Kumar challenged that arrangement before a Division Bench, but his appeal was dismissed in October 2025. The Bench noted that requiring Dhoni to appear before the Master’s Court inside the High Court campus would involve significant security arrangements because of his public profile, and found no legal difficulty with having an advocate commissioner record his evidence elsewhere.
The latest proceedings therefore focus not on the final merits of Dhoni’s ₹100-crore claim, but on how his testimony will be recorded and what procedural safeguards should accompany it. The High Court will consider Sampath Kumar’s requests after the applications are numbered and Dhoni is given an opportunity to respond.
