Former India and Chennai Super Kings captain MS Dhoni has been directed by the Madras High Court to deposit ₹10 lakh towards the cost of transcribing and translating compact discs submitted as evidence in his defamation suit related to the 2013 IPL spot-fixing and betting scandal.
Justice R.N. Manjula observed that translating and transcribing the Hindi audio recordings — including news clips and television debates — would be a massive exercise. The task would require a full-time interpreter and a typist for nearly three to four months.
The court ruled that since Dhoni is the plaintiff in the case, he must bear the cost of the exercise. The amount has to be deposited in the Chief Justice’s Relief Fund by March 12, 2026, to enable the 12-year-old civil suit to proceed.
“As the engagement of an official Interpreter is needed in view of the extraneous circumstances and as mentioned in the earlier order dated 28.10.2025, it is obligatory on the part of the plaintiff to pay the cost of the job done,” the order stated, as reported by Bar and Bench.
The trial has faced delays for over 12 years, largely due to multiple petitions filed by both sides seeking various reliefs.
In December 2023, a Division Bench comprising Justices S.S. Sundar (since retired) and Sunder Mohan found retired IPS officer G. Sampath Kumar guilty of criminal contempt of court and sentenced him to 15 days of simple imprisonment. However, in 2024, the Supreme Court of India stayed the sentence.
Dhoni had initiated contempt proceedings against the retired officer for allegedly making derogatory remarks about the Supreme Court and the High Court while defending himself in the defamation case. In July 2022, then Advocate General R. Shunmugasundaram granted consent to proceed with the contempt petition, noting that the statements in Kumar’s written reply appeared to insult the court and undermine its dignity.
On August 11, 2025, Justice C.V. Karthikeyan directed that the trial should commence and appointed an advocate commissioner to record Dhoni’s evidence at a location convenient for both parties. The judge observed that requiring the cricketer to appear at the High Court premises could lead to crowding and security concerns given his celebrity status.
Sampath Kumar challenged this order before a Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and Mohammed Shaffiq. In November 2025, the Bench dismissed the appeal, holding that Dhoni’s appearance at the High Court would necessitate extensive security arrangements and that appointing an advocate commissioner was appropriate in the circumstances.
