REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER, BCCI

ROLE OF BCCI

256. In the report of CBI, at pages 149-156, the functioning of BCCI has been analysed. Some of the observations by the CBI required explanations/replies to be submitted by BCCI to me.

257. On 12th November, 2000 I met Dr. A.C. Muthiah, President, BCCI at Radisson Hotel, Chennai, and he assured me to submit the explanations/replies soon in consultation with other members of BCCI. On 20th November, 2000, I was informed over phone on behalf of Dr. A.C. Muthiah that as the explanations/replies required consultation among the Members of BCCI and as the Members were on frequent tours for their own commercial and industrial activities, the explanation/replies would be submitted to me on 26th November, 2000, when I would be in south. I have conveyed to Dr. A.C. Muthiah, President, BCCI that I would try my best to submit my supplementary report regarding the role of BCCI by 27th November, 2000.

OPINION OF THE MINISTRY OF LAW, JUSTICE AND COMPANY AFFAIRS.

258. On my request, Shri Arun Jaitley, Hon'ble Minister for Law, Justice and Company Affairs has been kind enough to forward to me vide letter no. 2280 dated 22.11.2000 of the Ministry, copy of opinion dated 10th November, 2000 on the CBI Report furnished to the Hon'ble Minister of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India.

259. I have carefully perused the said opinion. A major part of the opinion relates to an analysis regarding criminal offences that may be relevant to consider in the context of the CBI report. This is not a matter for me to consider as Commissioner, BCCI but is for the Central Bureau of Investigation to keep in view, if it is decided to enquire/investigate the matter further.

260. What is relevant to the enquiry which I am presently conducting are the following observations/opinion expressed by the Hon'ble Minister for Law, Justice & Company Affairs.
"5. Evidence collected by the CBI As regards the findings of the CBI is concerned, it is evident that the Report has indicated the following:
a) The deep and pervasive nexus between some players and various bookies/punters.
b) The receipt by some of the players of gratification from the various bookies/punters.
c) The willingness of the delinquent players to act as conduit for bookies/punters by introducing them to other players for a consideration.
d) The regular and constant supply of 'information' by the delinquent players to various bookies/punters for a consideration.
e) Even though there appears to be strong reason to believe that some of the players were involved with the bookies/punters, to prove match fixing/cheating in the absence of evidence of underperformance appears to be difficult.
f) It may be mentioned that in order to withstand the rigours of a criminal trail, the standard of proof required has to be "beyond reasonable doubt" and each and every allegation has to be supported by evidence. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that in a criminal trial the degree of proof is stricter than what is required in a civil proceedings. In a criminal trial, however suspicious the facts and circumstances may be, the charges made against the accused must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and the requirement of proof cannot lie in the realm of surmises and conjectures. Suspicion cannot be a substitute for proof. This is in sharp contrast to the position in civil disputes. While in civil cases, facts may be proved by mere preponderance of probabilities, in criminal prosecution the level of proof must be beyond reasonable doubt. The same evidence which may be sufficient with regard to a fact to be proved in civil suit, may be considered insufficient for a conviction in a criminal action. It may be possible for the BCCI to sustain a disciplinary action against the delinquent players on the evidence collected than for a prosecution being held sustainable on the question of match fixing. (Emphasis supplied)
g) With regard to the foreign player named in the CBI report, (the report) merely reproduces only what the alleged bookie, MK has deposed. The report itself mentions that the CBI has not conducted an in-depth enquiry in the linkages of overseas players with Indian bookies/punters.

261. After considering the report of the CBI and the statements of the indicted persons recorded by me, I am in respectful agreement with the aforesaid opinion of the Hon'ble Minister. These have been the guiding principles in my enquiry also and the conclusion I am arriving at in this report are in accordance with the observations/opinion expressed as above by the Hon'ble Minister though I got a copy thereof only when I had drafted a large part of my report along its present lines.

262. In para 6 of the aforesaid opinion, the Hon'ble Minister for Law, Justice and Company Affairs has also tendered advice regarding the role of Government of India and BCCI. I shall refer to the said part of the opinion in my supplementary report which would be submitted after receiving the explanation/replies of BCCI regarding the observations made in the report of the CBI regarding BCCI.

THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT

263. Before I set out my final findings, I would like to deal with an important aspect to guide the Disciplinary Committee and the BCCI about the punishment to be imposed on persons who are found guilty by them.

264. As in any departmental enquiry, my brief in the present enquiry is only to give findings of guilt or otherwise of the persons indicted by the CBI. It is for the Disciplinary Committee of the BCCI and the BCCI itself to impose such punishments on the persons whom they find guilty on the basis of the report of the CBI and my report. However, to facilitate their doing so, I have to set out the principles that should govern the quantum of punishment that is to be imposed on the guilty. This is almost like a Judge briefing a Jury in countries like USA, where trial by Jury is still prevalent.

265. To punish crimes and misconduct is a recognised function in all Civil States. The drama of wrong doing and its retribution has indeed been an unending fascination for the human mind. During the last two centuries, the practices of punishment and public opinion concerning it have been profoundly modified due to the rapidly changing social values, sentiments of the people and humanitarian attitudes.

266. Before dealing with the theories of punishment, it would be pertinent to elaborate the concept of punishment. Sir Walter Moberly, while accepting the definition of punishment as given by Grotious, suggests that punishment presupposes that:-
1. What is inflicted is an ill, that is something unpleasant.
2. It is a sequel to some act which is disapproved by authority.
3. There is some correspondence between the punishment and the deed which has evoked it.
4. Punishment is inflicted, that is, it is imposed by someone's voluntary act.
5. Punishment is inflicted upon the criminal, or upon someone who is supposed to be answerable for him and for his doings.

267. In so far as the present enquiry is concerned, with reference to the theory at S.No. 5 above, I would say that punishment is inflicted upon a criminal or upon a person who is guilty of misconduct, which may not amount to a crime.

Back  Next

Mail Cricket Editor