he Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) which had investigated the match fixing scandal that broke in 2000 had clearly stated that it was hard to believe that the apex body of the sport in India, the Board Of Control For Cricket In India (BCCI), was ignorant of the match fixing and related malpractices that were happening in cricket.

In its 75-page report titled "Match fixing and related malpractices", prepared in 2000 after a detailed investigation and questioning of several players, the CBI said that the BCCI was duty-bound to keep a close watch on the performance of the team. However, it failed to do so. Excerpts from the report:

BCCI

The natural corollary to the fact that disclosures during the CBI enquiry have revealed a thriving player-bookie nexus in India for nearly a decade, begs the question: What was the BCCI doing all these years? CBI has enquired into the role and function of BCCI to evaluate whether it could have prevented the malpractices.

CBI enquiry into the affairs of the BCCI has not disclosed any direct evidence of nexus of any past or present office bearers of BCCI with the betting syndicate.

However, a perusal of statements of present and past officials of the Board like I.S. Bindra, Sunil Dev and Jaywant Lele has indicated that there were definite rumours/reports about match fixing and related malpractices from time to time.

It is also quite clear that the BCCI never seriously addressed this problem till the lid was blown after Hansie Cronje affair. It is obvious that, in spite of their public posturing now, all the office-bearers of BCCI over the past decade or so have been negligent in looking at this problem in spite of clear indications of this malaise making inroads into Indian Cricket.

The primary reason behind this is the lack of accountability of the BCCI to anyone. The structure of BCCI is such that it is very difficult for any person who has not previously held a post in BCCI or affiliate units to get into Cricket administration in India.

This not only prevents infusion of fresh blood and ideas but also perpetuates a system of self-aggrandisement. Even in the state units, it is extremely difficult to become a Member or an Office-Bearer for any person even with good cricketing credentials.

The functioning of BCCI at present reflects a dichotomy between running the affairs of the Board and administering cricket, in which only the first aspect receives overwhelming primacy.

Some of the policies of BCCI during the past decade which have directly contributed to match fixing and related malpractices are — (a) frequent tours to controversial venues like Sharjah, Singapore, Toronto, etc; (b) thoughtless increase in One Day Internationals.

CBI enquiry into match-fixing allegations has indicated that matches in non-regular venues such as Toronto and Singapore may be more prone to fixing/betting as there is a carnival-like atmosphere of non-seriousness at these venues.

India is the only country, which plays regularly in these arenas even at the cost of not touring regular Test playing nations like Australia, West Indies, South Africa, etc. which makes more sense in cricketing terms.

The ostensible reasons put forth by BCCI for touring these lesser venues is globalisation of cricket. It is difficult to understand why India should shoulder this burden when countries with a longer cricketing history like England and Australia are not doing so.

In addition to this is the disproportionate increase in one-day matches being played by India vis-à-vis other Test-playing nations. For example, in 1999 India played nearly 40 ODIs and is scheduled to play 53 ODIs in the first 13 months of year 2000-2001, which is one of the highest by a Test-playing nation.

The aforesaid factors have contributed to malpractices in two ways: (a) the players are more exposed to betting syndicates in non-regular venues; and (b) a surfeit of ODIs result in lower levels of motivation for players who may get a feeling that there is nothing wrong in throwing an occasional match....

During this enquiry, no evidence has come forth to prove that office-bearers of the BCCI over the years have received any money to ensure India's participation in any tournament. However, a study of guarantee money received by BCCI in some of the tournaments shows an interesting trend, which indicates that it is not commensurate with India's standing in the cricketing world. *

Today, every second person in the world watching cricket 'live' on television is probably an Indian which gives an enormous clout in financial terms to the BCCI. In view of this, BCCI can fix its own terms to tour any country to ensure its participation in an event, since the television rights for any tournament featuring India can be sold for a very heavy amount.

The BCCI, however, did not care to even investigate allegations which were bound to have been within their knowledge (for example, where there was a serious controversy over a slowdown in the run rate in the Kanpur one-dayer, 1994). Although there is no concrete evidence to suggest the direct involvement of any of the members of the BCCI in match fixing, their resolute indifference does give rise to suspicion that there was perhaps more than that meets the eye. It defies credulity to believe that the apex body was oblivious to such rampant match fixing and, therefore, did not find the need to investigate thoroughly the results of matches which are patently questionable.

BCCI is in control of huge amounts of public funds without any concomitant rules, regulations/laws that govern the manner in which public funds are to be utilised. There is no accountability of any office-bearer of the BCCI similar to the one imposed on public servants when dealing with public funds.

According to the report, the BCCI was under charging when it came to guarantee money it received to ensure India's participation in a tournament.

But this position is not reflected in the guarantee money received by BCCI as illustrated below: Tournament Guarantee Money Received by BCCI******

Money received by hosts for TV rights over India for the series ICC Wills Cup, 1998, Bangladesh Rs. 46 lakhs Rs. 35 crores Coca Cola Cup, 1998, Sharjah Rs. 68 lakhs Rs. 17 crores World Cup, 1999, UK Rs. 1.5 crores Rs. 26 crores The BCCI has been negligent in not preventing match-fixing and related malpractices in cricket in spite of clear signals about the malaise. This is mainly due to the fact that, for most office-bearers of BCCI, running the Board is an end in itself and the future of cricket is only incidental.

Statements given to the CBI

Sachin Tendulkar

Sachin Tendulkar, former Indian captain, when asked about the India-New Zealand Test at Ahmedabad in 1999, sated that by the end of third day's play when New Zealand had lost around 6 wickets, he had thought to himself that he would enforce the follow-on the next day.

On being asked whether anybody could have influenced this decision since the bookies in Delhi allegedly knew one day in advance that follow-on will not be enforced, he accepted that it was possible.

On being asked whether he suspected any Indian player of being involved in match-fixing, Sachin stated that during his tenure as Captain, he had felt that Mohd Azharuddin was not putting in 100% effort and he suspected that he was involved with some bookies.

On being asked about the India-West Indies match at Kanpur in 1994 when Manoj Prabhakar and Nayan Mongia batted slowly, he stated that he was the vice-captain during that match and he was absolutely sure that there were no instructions from the management for Manoj Prabhakar and Nayan Mongia to bat slowly and that he was so upset with their tactics that he did not talk to them after the match.Image 4th

Manoj Prabhakar

About the alleged offer made to him by Kapil Dev during the Singer Cup, 1994 in Sri Lanka, Manoj Prabhakar stated that, during the Singer Cup, he and Navjot Singh Sidhu were roommates in the hotel where the team was staying. The adjoining room in the hotel was connected to Manoj Prabhakar's room through a common door, and was occupied by Prashant Vaidhya and Nayan Mongia. One day, when he was in the bathroom, N. S. Sidhu called him and told him that "Paaji" had come with some offer and wanted to talk to him.

Thereafter, Kapil Dev told him that India had to loose the next match against Pakistan and Manoj Prabhakar will be paid Rs 25 lakh to underperform in the match. Manoj Prabhakar stated that he was flabbergasted at this offer and shouted at Kapil Dev. N.S. Sidhu was also present in the room at that time. Thereafter, Prashant Vaidhya and a Bengali journalist, who was sitting in Prashant Vaidhya's room, came to Prabhakar's room on hearing the commotion and asked him what had happened. Manoj Prabhakar told Prashant Vaidhya that Kapil Dev had offered him money to underperform.

After this incident, he reported the matter to Ajit Wadekar, manager of the team and also to Mohd. Azharuddin, the captain of the team. He also informed Ravi Shastri and Sunil Gavaskar who were doing commentary during that series, after a few days. On being asked whether Kapil Dev made this offer to some of the other players in the team also, Prabhakar stated that he had no proof to corroborate this. On being asked why he did not disclose these facts before the Justice Chandrachud Commmission, hestated that he wanted to disclose everything but Justice Chandrachud told him that he would not record anything which he would disclose and hence he did not see any point in mentioning Kapil Dev's offer to him. According to Manoj, one Hiren Hathi is very close to Kapil Dev and played cards for very high stakes. Similarly, Ajay Sharma is very close to Mohd. Azharuddin and acts as his agent.

Once, when Manoj was in the BCCI office in Bombay, one Prakash Kelkar introduced him to an unknown person. The latter requested Manoj Prabhakar to introduce him to some of the Indian players playing at that point of time in New Zealand. When asked about the purpose, that person revealed that he had lost a lot of money and had to make for it by fixing certain matches through some Indian players.

According to Prabhakar, he did not believe this man, whereupon the latter told him that he would ring up Ajit Wadekar and Mohd. Azharuddin and that Manoj Prabhakar could listen to the conversation on a parallel line. Thereafter, that person allegedly rang up Ajit Wadekar and Mohd. Azharuddin. To his shock, Manoj Prabhakar heard that both of them had a positive attitude towards fixing matches. Manoj Prabhakar knew all about their activities and, from then on, he was harassed continuously by cricket authorities.

Manoj Prabhakar admitted that he was introduced to MK (Mukesh Gupta, a known bookie) by Ajay Sharma sometime in 1990 and he knew him as John and not as Mukesh Gupta. He stated that he had met Mukesh Gupta 5-6 times only, but used to speak to him on the telephone. He further stated that he had seen MK abroad also.

He confessed that he had received money and that he used to receive only around Rs.25,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- for each piece of information. He was paid only when his information was of use to MK. Manoj admitted having made a phone call to Gus Logie at MK's request, but Logie had refused to do anything for MK. He accepted that he introduced Mark Waugh to MK in Hong Kong during a six-a-side tournament. He also admitted introducing Brian Lara, Salim Malik and Alec Stewart to MK. He stated that for these introductions, he had received money only once or twice. He stated that MK used to pay him money through one of his servants.

Prabhakar confessed that in the Ranji Trophy Quarter Final match of 1991 between Delhi and Bombay, he had given information to MK that Delhi would lose this match since some of the Delhi players were scheduled to play league cricket in England which was clashing with further Ranji Trophy engagements.

Mohammad Azharuddin

He accepted that he had taken money on some occasions from MK but did not underperform in most of the matches in which he had taken money. He stated that the Titan Cup match between India and South Africa at Rajkot in 1996 was fixed through MK, and revealed that Ajay Jadeja and Nayan Mongia were also involved along with him.

A match in the Pepsi Asia Cup in Sri Lanka in 1997 was also fixed through MK. He accepted that he had introduced MK to Hansie Cronje at Kanpur in 1996. On being asked whether punter Ameesh Gupta paid for his shopping at Harrods' in London in 1999 during the World Cup, he stated that he had made some purchases and Ameesh Gupta had paid for the same. On further questioning, he accepted that Ajay Gupta and his associates had approached him sometimes to fix matches.

He does not remember how much money he had received from them. The Pepsi Cup match between India and Pakistan at Jaipur in 1999 was fixed through them and Jadeja and Nayan Mongia were also involved with him in the deal. He was paid around Rs 10 lakh after that match by some unknown person on behalf of the Guptas.

Azhar admitted that Ameesh Gupta had given him mobile phone 98-111- 50860 through which he used to contact him during matches. On being asked whether he had met Dawood Ibrahim, he stated that he had seen him a few times in Sharjah where Dawood Ibrahim used to be present during cricket matches.

He denied having any telephonic conversation with him. On being asked whether he had spoken to Abu Salem, he stated that Abu Salem had rung him up on a couple of occasions and requested him to fix some matches but he had refused.

Ajay JadejaImage 2nd

On being asked whether he knew MK, he stated that he had never met him but all that he knew was that MK stayed next to cricketer Nikhil Chopra's house in Defence Colony.

He also denied that he went to MK's house at Defence Colony along with a girl and Ajay Sharma sometime in 1996. He, however, stated that since he met so many people he cannot remember all of them. On being asked whether he knew Uttam Chand, a bookie/ punter of Chennai, he stated that he did not know him. On being confronted with Uttam Chand's cell phone printout, which disclosed very frequent telephonic contact between both of them just before or during cricket matches, he stated that he recognised Uttam Chand's cell phone number but knew him as 'Gupta'. Jadeja stated that Uttam Chand used to ring him up often and tell him that if he did not talk to him, he would run into bad luck and because of superstition, he used to return his call.

Findings of the CBI inquiry

Manoj Prabhakar

The CBI inquiry has disclosed that Manoj Prabhakar, during his playing career and after retirement, had linkages with a number of bookies/ punters. There is also evidence of his having under-performed and passed on information and introduced other players to the betting syndicate.

There is also evidence of Prabhakar receiving money from them for rendering such services. Prabhakar has also placed bets on cricket matches. According to MK, he was introduced to Manoj Prabhakar in 1990 by Ajay Sharma, a fact endorsed by both Ajay Sharma and Manoj Prabhakar.

MK has also stated that Prabhakar under-performed at his behest in one of the Tests in England, which ended in a draw.

MK further stated that Prabhakar had 'sold' him the information about the Ranji Trophy quarter final match in 1991 between Delhi-Bombay. Prabhakar in his statement has accepted that he had provided the information that Delhi would lose the match but denied having received any money from Mukesh Kumar Gupta.

It has to be construed that the world information is a euphemism for underperforming or fixing. MK has referred to a number of instances when Prabhakar has introduced him to foreign players on payment of money. The evidence against Prabhakar discloses his nexus with a wide array of bookies/punters, which has contributed significantly to corrupting cricket in India and abroad.Image 5th

Mohammad Azharuddin

It is clear that Azharuddin contributed substantially towards the expanding bookie/player nexus in Indian cricket. The enquiry has disclosed that he received large sums of money from the betting syndicates to fix matches. There is also evidence which discloses that he roped in other players also to fix matches, which resulted in this malaise making further inroads into Indian cricket.

The evidence against Azharuddin, clearly establishes that he took money from bookies/punters to fix cricket matches and also the fact that the underworld had approached him to fix matches for them. MK has stated that he met Azharuddin sometime in 1995 through Ajay Sharma at Hotel Taj Palace, New Delhi. He paid a sum of Rs 50 lakh as 'advance' with an arrangement that this amount would be adjusted against the matches Azharuddin would 'do' for MK.

Ajay Sharma, in his statement, has corroborated that he introduced Azharuddin to MK since Azharuddin wanted somebody to finance some 'fashion show' and 'charity matches'.

Ajay Sharma adds that Azharuddin had telephonically confirmed to him that he had received money from MK. Azharuddin, in his statement, has admitted meeting MK through Ajay Sharma. He has further stated that MK had offered Rs 1.25 crore but the deal did not materialise.

MK has further stated that Azharuddin had specially agreed to 'do' some matches during the Titan Cup series in 1996.

MK adds that Azharuddin then gave him 'information' about two Tests at Ahmedabad and Calcutta in the 1996 series against South Africa.

Azharuddin, in his statement, has accepted receiving money from MK to fix some matches, but has stated that he 'did' only two matches for him — Titan Cup match in 1996 at Rajkot and 'some' match in Pepsi Asia Cup in Sri Lanka, 1997.

This 'admission' of Azhar that he 'did' only two matches for MK during this period appears a dilution of the actual facts in the context of the amount of money he had received from MK. MK has stated that he was introduced to Dr Ali Irani by Azharuddin during the Ahemdabad Test against South Africa in 1996.

Ajay Sharma has stated that, on one occasion, he had collected Rs 15 lakh from Ajay Gupta on Azharuddin's behalf and deposited the money in the locker of Azharuddin at Hotel Taj Palace through the then Food and Beverages Manager, Anil Saxena. This has been further corroborated by Anil Saxena, the then Food and Beverages Manager at Taj Palace Hotel, New Delhi, who used to handle Azharuddin's locker in his absence.

The nexus between Azharuddin and Ajay Gupta is further corroborated through their cell-phone print outs which disclose frequent calls between Azharuddin and Ajay Gupta/ Ameesh Gupta especially during the matches.

In view of the large amount of money Azhar has received from Guptas and the 'hospitality' he has enjoyed though them it is very difficult to believe that he 'did' only one match for them. Azharuddin has also stated during his examination that Abu Salem had rung him up on a couple of occasions to fix matches but he had refused. Ali Irani, in his statement, has said that Azharuddin had told him once that "he was 'doing' matches for Anees Ibrahim and hence, he cannot do with anyone else."

Ajay Jadeja

Ajay Jadeja has close relations with a number of bookies/punters, including Rajesh Kalra, Rattan Mehta, Uttam Chand, Krishan Kumar (implicated in the Hansie Cronje case) and Ajay Gupta. He has also given "judgement" and "information" regarding cricket matches to bookies Uttam Chand and Rattan Mehta.

It has emerged in the enquiry that Jadeja met MK in 1996 and offered to "do" matches for him. As he could not promise the help of other players except one, the deal did not materialise. Both MK and Uttam Chand have stated that they paid money to Ajay Jadeja. During the enquiry, a print-out of the cell phone number 98100 34882 of Jadeja for the period from 15.9.99 to 30.4.2000 was taken and studied. A scrutiny of the print-out has disclosed that Jadeja had made and received telephone calls in varying numbers from and to Rajesh Kalra, a punter, Rattan Mehta, a big time punter and Krishan Kumar.

Nayan Mongia

His name has figured in match fixing and related malpractices in the statements of Azharuddin, Dr Ali Irani, Ajay Sharma and others. In fact, Azharuddin has stated that he used to rope in Mongia also whenever he "did" matches However, in spite of strong suspicion against Nayan Mongia, due to lack of corroboration on material particulars, the evidence against him is not all that strong. I.S. Bindra has stated that Dr Ali Irani, who was the physiotherapist of Indian team between 1987 and 1997, had told him that Mongia was one of the players who had placed bets in England on a match not involving India. Nayan Mongia, in his statement, has denied that he has intentionally underperformed in any match. Even though there is no direct evidence linking Nayan Mongia in match fixing, his being named by various sources and the fact that he is not able to explain his slow batting and passing of instructions to Manoj Prabhakar to preserve wickets rather than go for runs in the India-West Indies one-dayer in Kanpur in 1994 does bring him under strong suspicion.Image 3rd

Kapil Dev

His telephone/cell phone analysis has not disclosed any contact with bookies/punters. Two of his close associates, Karun Dube and Hiren Hathi, were also enquired into to find whether Kapil Dev could have operated through them. The enquiry has not disclosed either Karun Dube or Hiren Hathi having linkages with the betting syndicate. Their telephone/cell phone analysis has also not indicated any contacts with bookies/punters. Uttamchand, a bookie from Chennai, has stated that Kapil Dev had on one occasion played cards in a large group at Hotel Adyar Park Sheraton, Chennai. Although Uttamchand was a part of that card playing group, he did not personally know Kapil Dev and the "card group" was also organised by one Hira Lal and not by him. In the case of Kapil Dev, no evidence has surfaced so far of his linkages with the betting syndicate, both during his playing career and after retirement. In fact, the CBI has examined a number of bookies/ punters of Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Lucknow, and other places, but the name of Kapil Dev does not figure as a possible suspect in any of their statements.

The finding of the report, which was made public, after taking the concurrence of the then Prime Minister A.B.Vajpayee, named five national players who were involved in match fixing. Mohammad Azharuddin, Ajay Jadeja, Nayan Mongia, Ajay Sharma and Manoj Prabhakar.However, after the initial storm, all these cricketers are now living a normal life.

Action on the CBI findingsImage 6th

The players escaped legal punishment as there was no law related to match fixing or betting in the Indian Penal code. This report was discussed in detail with the Solicitor General of India, Harish Salve, who has scanned the evidence and is in broad agreement that no criminal charges under cheating or under the Gambling Act can be filed against anyone because of the nebulous position of law in this regard, as well as the improbability of investigating agency being able to obtain sufficient legal evidence. Thus, from the opinions expressed above, it is evident that, the facts as disclosed in the enquiry do not constitute any offence under the provisions of Indian Penal Code. Similarly, it is not possible to prosecute anyone under the Public Gambling Act due to the restrictions imposed as per Sec. 468 of Chapter XXXVI of the CrPC.