New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday declined to urgently list a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought the cancellation of the upcoming India-Pakistan cricket match scheduled for September 14 in the Asia Cup T20 tournament. The plea, filed in light of recent terror attacks, argued that proceeding with the match undermines national sentiment and sacrifices made by the armed forces.
The matter was mentioned before a bench comprising Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi, who did not find any compelling urgency in the request.
“What is the urgency? It’s a match, let it be,” Justice Maheshwari remarked, declining to list the matter for immediate hearing.
When the counsel insisted that the match is scheduled for this Sunday, and failure to list the plea would render it infructuous, the bench remained unmoved. “What can we do in that? Let it be. The match should go on,” the judge reiterated.
Petition Cites National Sentiment, Recent Attacks
The petition was filed by four law students who argued that allowing India to play against Pakistan in the wake of recent events — notably the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor — sends a conflicting message.
According to the plea, hosting a sporting event with Pakistan while mourning recent losses caused by Pakistan-based terror groups is “insensitive to the families of victims and harmful to the nation’s morale.”
“Cricket cannot be celebrated while lives are being lost. It sends the wrong signal — that entertainment takes precedence over national security and the sacrifices of our soldiers,” the petition states.
Broader Demands in the Plea
Beyond the immediate demand for cancelling the India-Pakistan match, the petitioners also urged the Court to direct the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports to implement the newly enacted National Sports Governance Act, 2025.
One of the key contentions was the lack of regulatory oversight on the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The plea argues that under the new law, cricket — especially the widely followed season ball (hard ball) format — should be brought under the jurisdiction of the National Sports Federation and the newly formed National Sports Board.
“BCCI must no longer remain an autonomous body operating beyond public accountability,” the petition asserts, adding that inclusion under government regulation would ensure that national interest is reflected in decisions taken by sports bodies.
Court Unwilling to Intervene in Match Scheduling
Despite the multi-faceted nature of the PIL, the Court chose to steer clear of the scheduling or cancellation of a sporting event, emphasizing judicial restraint in matters related to sports administration and diplomacy.
Justice Maheshwari, in a somewhat lighthearted remark, added, “Every day one side, other side, there’s a match… one ball…”—indicating the judiciary’s reluctance to halt sporting events over political concerns.
What Lies Ahead?
While the Supreme Court has declined to treat the matter as urgent, the petition could still be heard at a later date — albeit after the match has already been played. Whether the broader demands related to sports governance and BCCI oversight gain traction in future hearings remains to be seen.
