‘Why not take Indian citizenship?’: Bombay HC asks 12 OCI cardholders challenging BCCI's Indian passport rule

The Bombay High Court has questioned 12 young cricketers holding Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cards who have challenged the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) decision to make an Indian passport mandatory for participation in its tournaments. The court orally observed that those keen to represent India could consider applying for Indian citizenship.

A division bench of Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna was hearing petitions filed by Kavin Kartik, Avik Dixit, Ram Repala, Ameyamanasa Reddy Pamulapati, Ayaan Mohammed Ahmed, Vedant Pathak, Nirvetla Rishith Reddy, Kothapally Kritin Reddy, Kothapally Arnav Reddy, Ritesh Sai Eswar, Aryan Singh Sidhu and Kudugunta Krithik Reddy.

The bench noted that the Central government, which has been made a party to the case, had not yet filed its response. Although the court indicated that the hearing could be postponed, advocate Kunal Cheema, assisted by advocate Datta Mane, urged the judges to consider the petitions.

Cheema argued that the players were seeking permission to participate only in domestic tournaments, not an immediate right to represent India internationally. Playing in these competitions would allow them to build up their performance records, which could help them qualify for the likes of Indian Premier League (IPL).

He also submitted that OCI cardholders were allowed to participate in such competitions until 2023, when the BCCI introduced the restriction. According to the counsel, the petitioners are young cricketers who study and live in India, and their cases deserved consideration.

The judges, however, pointed out that India already has a large pool of cricketing talent. Chief Justice Tripathi questioned whether other countries would allow foreign nationals or overseas citizens to compete in domestic sporting competitions when their own citizens were available.

The bench also drew a comparison with government jobs and civil service examinations, asking whether OCI cardholders could compete for such opportunities. The Chief Justice suggested that objections from domestic players might have contributed to the BCCI’s decision.

Cheema argued that the restriction created a barrier to the players’ cricketing ambitions. He said that even if they wanted to play in the IPL, they first needed domestic performances and statistics to establish their credentials. The BCCI’s rule prevented them from building that record through its tournaments.

Responding on behalf of the BCCI, senior advocate Dr Birendra Saraf said the Citizenship Act did not permit OCI cardholders to represent India at the international level. He also referred to the Central government’s position that only Indian citizens could play for the country.

Saraf argued that the BCCI invests in identifying, training and developing players through its domestic competitions. He cited tournaments such as the Ranji Trophy and said the petitioners could continue playing in school and college competitions, private academies and other tournaments outside the board’s jurisdiction.

The BCCI’s position, he submitted, was that the players could continue pursuing cricket as a hobby but could not claim a right to earn a livelihood through competitions organised by the board.

The Chief Justice reiterated that the petitioners were free to pursue education and play cricket but questioned why they insisted on participating in BCCI-run tournaments without taking Indian citizenship. The bench said the country had considerable domestic talent and that the players would have to make a choice.

Saraf added that the BCCI would welcome the players if they became Indian citizens.

Cheema, meanwhile, said he would place international conventions before the court at the next hearing, scheduled for November 25, to argue that children have a right to choose their citizenship and should not be compelled to change it.

The bench clarified that it was not directing the petitioners to change their citizenship, but was suggesting an option in response to their request to participate in BCCI tournaments.

Saraf also informed the court that some OCI cardholders had already applied for Indian citizenship and that their applications were being processed.

The court directed the BCCI, the Central government and the petitioners to provide details of the status of these applications at the next hearing.