REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER, BCCI

(a) A large amount of betting takes place on cricket in India. (Para 22/Page 91)

(b) No journalist is involved in betting or match fixing as no credible evidence was available to justify such implication. (Para 23/page 91)

(c) The data before the Committee did not show that any Indian player, official or journalist had ever taken part in fixing a match or that any of them lays bets on cricket for the purpose of match fixing so as to lose a match. There is undoubtedly large scale betting on cricket but that is a law and order problem. (Para 24/Page 92)

(d) The Committee was sure that with the good intentions of so many well informed persons, the game of cricket will thrive in India and the rumours of match fixing will die a natural death. It will be a sad day if the common men and women, on whose support the game has occupied a pride of place, will stay away, believing that the bookies, not the chosen eleven, play the game. (Para 27/Page 94).

12. On the basis of the evidence which was available to the Committee, the aforesaid conclusions arrived at by the Chandrachud Committee in November, 1997 were correct and unobjectionable. However, on the basis of the subsequent developments in general and the enquiry conducted by the CBI in particular, some of these conclusions are not valid any more. This will become obvious in the analysis which I would be presenting in later in this report.

ASPECT WHICH HAS BEEN OMITTED BY CBI

13. The entire report of the CBI deals with evidence pertaining to match fixing and betting as well as the involvement of bookies, punters, players etc. therein. There is however an extremely important aspect which should have been considered and opinion given by the CBI which has not been done. I am setting it out at the outset as I will often refer to the said aspect later in this my report.

14. In many Regular Cases and Preliminary Enquiries which are investigated/enquired into by the CBI, very frequently misconduct committed by public servants, which may not amount to any offence, but violates accepted and expected norms of human conduct in general and Conduct Rules in particular are proved. In such cases, CBI always recommends departmental action for imposing punishment on the guilty persons which punishment should not doubt be commensurate with the misconduct which stood proved.

15. Following are a few illustrative instances of such violation of norms of human conduct:

(a) An SHO often being in close contact with and meeting smugglers, brothel keepers, other criminals etc. and later claiming, when caught, that he was not mixed up with them but was just in frequent contact and that even the meetings were innocuous.

(b) The Chief Secretary of a State often contacting and meeting shady industrialists and businessmen without any official purpose and later claiming, when caught, that the contacts and meetings were innocuous.

(c) A Government official frequently contacting and meeting Embassy staff of a country which is known to be hostile to India and later claiming, when caught, that the contacts and meetings were innocent.

(d) A man frequently contacting and meeting women of ill repute and later claiming, when caught, that such contacts and meetings were platonic.

16. I would be seen that in each of the illustrative instances cited above, which by no means are exhaustive, the person concerned is clearly guilty of misconduct which may not amount to a crime. Such acts by such persons would be misconduct even if there is no Code of Conduct in place. The reason for this is that such activities are undesirable and therefore prohibited by necessary implication, even by normal rules of acceptable human behaviour.

17. In this case, the CBI report clearly establishes that some of the indicted players were in frequent contacts with bookies/punters. The question that arises is whether such senior players were morally correct in even maintaining such close relationship with such bookies/punters. I am of the view that irrespective of the allegation of match fixing/betting and non-existence of the Code of Conduct of BCCI prior to 1st October, 2000, the concerned players are definitely guilty of undesirable activities and misconduct as they were players of eminence and were selected by the BCCI for representing the country at international level. Such players are role models for people in general and budding cricketers in particular and ought not have maintained such close relationship with bookies/punters. I am of the view that on this ground also the concerned players are guilty of misconduct, wherever such contacts and/or meetings are proved by preponderance of probabilities.

PRELIMINARY ASPECTS IN THE REPORT OF THE CBI

18. At Pages 1-13 of the report, CBI has set out the parameters, mechanics used, interpretation of the terminology of match fixing, history of betting syndicates in India, betting procedure, names and addresses of major bookies and punters, dimensions of betting and manipulations. To ensure brevity, it is not necessary to reiterate in my report the contents of the CBI report in respect of the aforesaid aspects. It is suggested that the CBI report itself may please be perused in this regard. I would however state that the approach and observations of the CBI on these aspects are generally correct.

STATEMENTS OF BOOKIES AND PUNTERS

19. At Pages 14 to 54 of the report, CBI has set out in detail the statements of bookies and punters recorded by the CBI. The names of such persons whose statements have been recorded by the CBI and reproduced in the report are as under:-
i) Mukesh Kumar Gupta @ M.K. Gupta @ M.K. @ John
ii) Anil Nagada @ Anil Steel
iii) Anand Sagar Saxena @ Anand @ Chikna
iv) Sanjeev Kohli @ Tipu Kohli
v) Deepak Rajouri
vi) Sanjeev Sacher @ Babloo
vii) Naveen Sachdeva @ Tinku
viii) Jai Bhagwan Gupta
ix) Nishit Goel
x) Ajay Gupta
xi) Sanjay Anand
xii) Anil Saxena
xiii) Pawan Puri
xiv) Rattan Mehta
xv) Uttam Chand Jain @ Topi
xvi) Rajesh Kalra
xvii) Shobhan Mehta
xviii) Daleep Seth @ Satyam Baba

20. Relevant statements of most of the above persons, which as recorded by the CBI are available in Vol.-II of my report.

Back  Next

Mail Cricket Editor