REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER, BCCI

ROLE OF BCCI

241. CBI had examined Dr. Ali Irani at the height of the match fixing scandal. At that time every involved person was in a mood to convey everything truthfully to CBI. I am, therefore, of the view that Dr. Irani did mention in the statement recorded by the CBI as set out in the copy of his statement which has been made available by the CBI. Dr. Irani has significantly and cleverly spoken about the antipathy which Azharuddin developed against him during 1994-95. The selection by Dr. Irani of this period is obviously because M.K. was introduced by Azharuddin to him in 1996. What Dr. Irani tries to establish now by inference is that in as much as a cold war situation arose between him and Azharuddin in 1994-95, it is not possible that from 1996 onwards M.K. was making some of the payments to Azharuddin through Dr. Irani.

242. For the reasons set out above my final opinion regarding the role of Dr. Ali Irani is as under:-
i) He acted as a conduit between Mohd. Azharuddin and the betting syndicate, including in accepting payments of large amounts of cash on behalf of Azharuddin.
ii) He had close contacts with bookies/punters like M.K. Gupta and Anil Steel in this regard. iii) Irrespective of the allegations established as above, he is also guilty of unbecoming conduct as the physiotherapist of the Indian Team for maintaining frequent contacts with bookies/punters.

RAM ADHAR @ CHOUDHARY

243. CBI has set out the statement of Ram Adhar @ Choudhary as recorded by the CBI at page 35 of their report. It reads as under:

"Ram Adhar @ Choudhary, an employee of DDCA for the past 25-30 years, works as groundsman at Feroze Shah Kotla. Choudhary knows Ajay Sharma very well. In the year 1996, before the India-Australia Test Match at Feroze Shah Kotla, Ajay Sharma contacted him 3-4 days prior to the match and told him to meet him on a particular date at Rajghat. Choudhary went to Rajghat on the particular date and Ajay Sharma was present there along with another person. They made him sit in their car and told him that the pitch for the India-Australia Test should be prepared in such a way that it was result-oriented. Accordingly, he had prepared the pitch and the India-Australia match concluded in just over three and a half days. Choudhary confessed that Ajay Sharma gave him a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for this."

244. CBI has made available to me his statement in Hindi as recorded by the CBI which is at Page 036 of Vol.-II.

245. On a comparison of the two statements set out above, it would be seen that there are some variations between the two. The important difference is that in the gist of the statement of Ram Adhar @ Choudhary as furnished by CBI in its own report is that on a particular date which was mentioned by Ajay Sharma, Ram Adhar himself went to Rajghat where Ajay Sharma was present along with another person. They made him sit in their car and told him that the pitch for the India-Australia test should be prepared in such a way that it was result-oriented. Accordingly, Ram Adhar had prepared the pitch and the India-Australia match concluded in just over 3 1/2 days.

246. However, in the copy of his statement in Hindi recorded by the CBI, made available to me, Ram Adhar had supposedly said that Ajay Sharma had visited Ram Adhar and took him to Rajghat for a secret conversation. There one person was present. They made him sit in a car and asked him to prepare a spinning pitch. They also gave him Rs. 50,000/-. Ram Adhar promised to prepare such a pitch. Thereafter, Ajay Sharma and the other person dropped him near DDCA. Thereafter, he prepared such a pitch.

247. Though the substantive part of the statement is the same, namely Ram Adhar being paid Rs. 50,000 by Ajay Sharma and another person to prepare a spinning pitch, the manner in which the activities took place are differently set out in the statement in Hindi recorded by CBI and its English version which appears in the report of CBI. This differences could have arisen in the process of translation and is not material as the ultimate purport is the same.

248. In the statement recorded by me, Ram Adhar came out with a third version. The said statement is at Pages 133-134 of Vol.-III. As he cannot read or write, his statement in Hindi as recorded by CBI, was read out to him in my presence by Shri Pankaj Bharadwaj, Junior Administrator, DDCA, who also read out and explained to him his statement in English as recorded by me.

249. In the statement recorded by me he stated that on 8th August, 2000, CBI officials visited DDCA and took him in a car to CBI office at 11 a.m. He was kept there for two or three hours. They beat him up severely and recorded the statement in Hindi, which was read out to him. He gave the said statement because they had beaten him and compelled him to say as such. He does not know the names or the ranks of the concerned persons. In other words, he confirmed before me that he gave such statement in hindi, but due to third degree applied on him.

250. Ram Adhar then proceeded to state as under before me: "The actual fact is that Shri Ajay Sharma took me to Rajghat as mentioned in the statement. There, in a phone which was keeping in his hand, he called someone and that man came after some time. He was tall and fat. I cannot gave his approximate age. They asked me to prepare a spinning pitch. I told them that I cannot do so as the person appointed by DDCA to be in-charge of the pitch, gives us instructions on the preparation of the pitch. On my telling this, they dropped me by car at DDC, Feroz Shah Kotla".

251. It will be seen that about the actual incident, Ram Adhar gives a different version from the CBI version about how the second person visited Rajghat only when Ajay Sharma telephoned the said person. Regarding the preparation of a spinning pitch, Ram Adhar stated "I told them that I cannot do so as the person appointed by DDCA to be in-charge of the pitch, gives us instructions on the preparation of pitch. On my telling this they dropped me by car at DDCA, Feroze Shah Kotla".

252. Ram Adhar added before me that they had not offered to pay him Rs. 50,000 for preparing spinning pitch and he did not took Rs. 50,000 from them.

253. He admitted however that he knows Ajay Sharma as he is a Delhi player.

254. I find that CBI has not analysed at all the evidence against Ram Adhar anywhere at Pages 97-148 of the report where the analysis of the evidence against others has been done. This appears to be an omission by the CBI as the statement of Ram Adhar as recorded by CBI would implicate him in preparing a spinning pitch which could lead to match fixing.

255. However, even without any finding being arrived at by me on the allegation of Ram Adhar that third degree method was applied on him, on account of the significant discrepancies in the evidence relating to Ram Adhar as explained by me above, I am of the view that even on the theory of preponderance of probabilities, the allegation against him is not proved. I therefore, exonerate Ram Adhar @ Choudhary of the charge against him.

Back  Next

Mail Cricket Editor