REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER, BCCI

190. Instead of further explaining the analysis of CBI against Ajay Jadeja in my language, it would be in the fitness of things to reproduce below the analysis and the exact words of CBI as at Pages 114-120.

"At the insistence of M.K. Gupta, Ajay Sharma introduced Ajay Jadeja to M.K. Gupta in 1996. M.K. Gupta has stated that Ajay Jadeja came to this house along with Ajay Sharma and a girl and offered to "do" matches for him. However, no deal could be struck as Ajay Jadeja was only offering his services along with those of Nayan Mongia. M.K. Gupta has further stated that he paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to Jadeja during this meeting. Ajay Sharma has corroborated the statement of M.K. Gupta and has further stated that of the Rs. 50,000/- paid by M.K. Gupta, Jadeja kept Rs. 32,000/- himself to purchase a cell phone and gave the remaining Rs. 18,000/- to him. On the other hand, Ajay Jadeja has stated that he does not remember meeting M.K. Gupta, since he had met so many people in his life. He has also denied having received Rs. 50,000/- from M.K. Gupta. Anil Steel, a bookie from Bombay has also stated that he once saw Ajay Jadeja in the hotel room of M.K. Gupta in Calcutta during the inaugural ceremony of the World Cup Cricket, 1996, which corroborates the links between Jadeja and M.K.

'During the enquiry, a printout of the cell phone number 98100 34882 of Ajay 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 Ajay Jadeja had made and received telephone calls in varying numbers from and to Rajesh Kalra, a punter, Rattan Mehta, a big time punter, Uttam Chand, a bookie/punter, Ajay Gupta, a punter and Krishan Kumar (implicated in the Hansie Cronje case). When questioned about these contacts, Ajay Jadeja stated that he knew Kalra as they visited the same Gym at Hotel Park Royal. Jadeja, however, denied that he ever discussed cricket with Rajesh Kalra or passed on any information about cricket matches to him.

'Ajay Jadeja accepts that he knows Krishan Kumar, but he did not have any knowledge that he was a punter. He admits that he is very close to Rattan Mehta but denies that he know Rattan Mehta was a big-time punter. Ajay Jadeja has specifically denied that he fixed matches for Rattan Mehta. Rattan Mehta in his examination supported the statement of Ajay Jadeja about being close to him and admitted taking Ajay Jadeja's 'judgement' on certain matches. It is, however, difficult to accept Jadeja's statement that he did not know that Rattan Mehta was a big time punter, given his accepted closeness to Rattan Mehta. Jadeja's statement is further suspect in the light of the statement of Pawan Puri, a punter of Delhi, who has stated that he had travelled with Ajay Jadeja on a flight from Mumbai to Delhi during which they discussed cricket matches and Jadeja had at that time told him that he had "done" matches for Rattan Mehta during the 'India-A' and 'India-B', Challenger Trophy in February, 2000. (Ajay Jadeja was the Captain of India-B Team which lost both its matches.)

'Md. Azharuddin, during his examination, stated that in the Titan Cup Series in 1996, he had 'made' matches for M.K. Gupta and that Ajay Jadeja and Nayan Mongia were also stated that he had absolutely no doubt about the involvement of Ajay Jadeja with Azharuddin, and that in 1996, during a one-day match, Ajay Jadeja had also told him not to talk about "such things" to him as he was no longer into it. Dr. Ali Irani has further stated that he suspected that Ajay Jadeja made this statement to him, because by that time, Jadeja probably knew that Azharuddin had confided to him (Dr. Ali Irani) about match-fixing.

'Another major bookie/punter Uttam Chand, during his examination, has stated that he used to get "information" regarding various aspects of the match from Jadeja in matches in which India was playing. On the basis of information provided by Jadeja, he used to further place bets. Uttam Chand has also disclosed that he paid a sum of Rs. 1 lakh initially at the time when he was introduced to Ajay Jadeja at a function in Hotel Chola Sheraton in Chennai, and later he paid a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs through 'Hawala' transfer when Ajay Jadeja was in Mumbai during a match. Ajay Jadeja has denied that he received any money from Uttam Chand. He has also stated that initially he only thought that Uttam Chand was his 'fan' and used to talk to him in order to avoid the nuisance of continuous calls from him. Jadeja has further stated that, after some time, he did get an inkling that Uttam Chand was a bookie. On being asked as to why he continued talking to Uttam Chand even after coming to know that he was a bookie, Jadeja could not provide a satisfactory answer.

'The assertion of Jadeja that often he would talk to Uttam Chand only to get rid of the nuisance of continuous telephone calls is difficult to accept, as Jadeja could very easily have firmly told Uttam Chand not to ring him up. He could also have declined to take any calls from Uttam Chand. On the contrary, he not only accepted calls from Uttam Chand and talked to him for minutes, but also, on occasions, returned the call of Uttam Chand. The timings of the call between Uttam Chand and Jadeja also suggest great familiarity between the two as there have been a number of calls around midnight. It seems peculiar as to why Jadeja should be talking to a bookie/punter around midnight, specially when he is scheduled to play a match the next morning. It is also of interest that Uttam Chand and Jadeja have spoken to each other, only a day prior to a match or on the day of the match. There have been no calls between them during a gap between two series or even during a gap in matches during a particular series. The connection between Uttam Chand and Jadeja is, therefore, not innocent. The connection between the two becomes further suspect as telephone calls in the print-out of Uttam Chand's Cell Phone No. 98400 37700 show that on occasions after talking to Jadeja he has spoken to well-known bookies such as Shobhan Mehta of Mumbai and Hans Kumar Jain of Delhi etc.

'A random sample of Cell phone calls between Jadeja and Uttam Chand are reproduced below as an illustration. Many of the calls made by Uttam Chand to Jadeja are of short duration and these are probably messages left in the voice mail:-
1. 10.10.1999 - 2 calls from Uttam Chand to Jadeja. They were made on the first day of 1st Test Match between India and New Zealand at Mohali.
2. 11.10.1999 - 8 calls from Uttam Chand to Jadeja. These were made on the 2nd day of the Mohali Test Match.
3. 12.10.1999 - 23 calls from Uttam Chand on the third day of the Test Match.
4. 13.10.1999 - 46 calls from Uttam Chand on the fourth day of the Test Match.
5. 14.10.1999 - 1 call from Uttam Chand on the last day of Mohali Test Match.
6. 28.10.1999 - 24 calls from Uttam Chand. This was one day prior to the Third Test Match between India - New Zealand at Ahmedabad.
7. 29.10.1999 - 13 calls from Uttam Chand. This was the first day of the 3rd Test Match.
8. 30.10.1999 - 62 calls from Uttam Chand on the 2nd day of the Test Match.
9. 31.10.1999 - 30 calls from Uttam Chand. This was the third day of the Test Match.
10. 01.11.1999 - 50 calls from Uttam Chand on the 4th day of the Test Match.
11. 02.11.1999 - 14 calls from Uttam Chand on the last day of the Test Match.
12. 13.11.1999 - 48 calls from Uttam Chand to Jadeja and 1 call from Jadeja to Uttam Chand. This was one day prior to the India-New Zealand one-dayer at Guwahati.
13. 14.11.1999 - 5 calls from Uttam Chand on the day of Guwahati one-dayer.
14. 16.11.1999 - 55 calls from Uttam Chand to Jadeja and 1 from Jadeja to Uttam Chand one day prior to the 5th one dayer between India and New Zealand at Delhi.
15. 11.3.2000 - Uttam Chand has made 28 calls. This was one day prior to the one-dayer between India-South Africa at Jamshedpur.
16. 12.3.2000 - Uttam Chand has made 3 calls on the day of the Jamshedpur one-dayer.

'The evidence against Ajay Jadeja clearly established that he has been close to a number of bookies/punters and has provided them "information" about cricket matches on payment of money. However, it has to be surmised that no bookie/punter will pay money for 'information', which is very easily available on television and the word is used as a subterfuge for underperforming and match-fixing.

'Ajay Jadeja was extremely intransigent during his examination, and, even when confronted with evidence issued bland denials".

191. Having set out the analysis made by the CBI, I have to now deal with the defence of Ajay Jadeja taken in the compilation given by him to me. At this stage, I have to compliment Ajay Jadeja -- nay his legal advisor - on the systematic manner his defence has been set out. It is neither possible for me nor is it called for that to reproduce in my report the entire 20 pages of his narrative explanation. Suffice to say, the explanation deals with all the aspects dealt with in the CBI report. Broadly stated, Ajay Jadeja vehemently contests the probative value of such facts as interpreted by the CBI. In other words, his present pleas are in the nature of the illustrative examples I have set out in para 15 of this report.

192. Towards the end of his explanation, he has made the following submissions (Pages 19-20 of his compilation).

"Other Issues

I have in this submission, attempted to clear my name and establish my innocence on the basis of detailed refutations and explanations in relation to each of the allegations and other references made against me in the report. At the same time the Hon'ble Commissioner will have noted, as I have, that there are certain potentially serious infirmities with the Report and the manner in which it has been used. I make no effort to hide behind legal niceties as I feel I have justified my position on the basis of the facts alone, but I would seek your permission to make a few brief points here.

a) It is submitted that the materials and statements collected during the course of an investigation, much less an enquiry, can not be equated with and be treated as legally admissible evidence as they are statements made to a police officer. Yet they are being treated as evidence and persons named in the report were and continue to be condemned on this basis without being given an opportunity to respond to the allegations before the findings are made. Consequently, the Report and the process by which it was finalised makes it wrong, arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the principles of natural justice.

b) The analysis and conclusions are self-serving statements arrived at on the basis of pre-conceived notions and without any credible evidence. Many statements made are vague and lacking even in basic material particulars.

c) I would like to submit that with callous disregard, my reputation, built over a long period of time by hard work and sincere effort, has been washed away by the calculated leakage of the Report of the CBI and unfair comments and trail by press. This has caused immense and irreparable harm and injury."

193. The attempt by Ajay Jadeja has been establish, what he has stated at the outset itself at Page 1 of his compilation.

• At no time in my career have I been involved with match fixing as defined in the CBI Report.
• At no time have I ever accepted money or any other form of consideration for underperforming or providing information in a cricket match, whether at domestic, international or any other level.
• At all times when I have had the privilege of representing my country, state or Board, I have played the game to the very best of my ability and skill."

194. I have already analysed at appropriate places my assessment of the important allegations in respect of Ajay Jadeja. In particular, I may state that in this inquiry against him and others it is not theory of benefit of doubt is to be applied but the theory of preponderance of probabilities. As this is not a Court trail, evidence recorded by CBI officers is admissible. I therefore hold, on the basis of the evidence available and after considering the pleas taken by Ajay Jadeja before the CBI and myself, that he is guilty of gross misconduct.

195. Before I proceed to set out my final opinion, I cannot but express my subjective view about Ajay Jadeja as a player. Shorn of his misconduct, he is a bubbling youngster, full of energy and it is a delight to watch on and off the field. He has had a great future as a cricket player at international level and this has been affected by his unwisely getting too much mixed up with bookies/punters leading to the nemesis where he finds himself now. As an Indian, it is with sadness that I have to record the following, which I am however compelled to do as Commissioner, BCCI.

196. My final opinion regarding the role of Ajay Jadeja in this is as under:-
i) He had very close undesirable contacts and objectionable nexus with various bookies/punters.
ii) He is guilty of unbecoming conduct and misconduct as a national level player on account of his maintaining such frequent contacts as set out above with bookie/punters.

197. Before parting with the case of Ajay Jadeja, I must record that I do not agree with the observations of CBI that "Ajay Jadeja was extremely intransigent during the examination, and, even when confronted with evidence, issued bland denials". I am afraid that this observation by the CBI is unwarranted as CBI cannot expect every suspected person to confess before them and help them to solve their case with ease. A large majority of the accused persons in such cases always deny their involvement in their case, even when strong evidence is available against them.

The skill of the investigator lies in proving their involvement and get over the pleas taken by such suspected persons and not crib about their non-cooperation. In this case, CBI has in fact succeeded in their task and brought out abundant evidence against Ajay Jadeja. What I object to is, therefore, not about the work done by the CBI, but about this observation which brings out a state of mind which a police officer, least of all a CBI officer, should never have.

NAYAN MONGIA

198. In the report, the salient features of the statement of Nayan Mongia recorded by CBI is furnished at Pages 79-80. I have obtained from the CBI his full statement as recorded by the CBI, which is available at Pages 032-035 of Vol.-II. His statement recorded by me and the documents given by him to me are placed at Pages 124-132 of Vol.-III.

199. In the statement recorded by CBI, Mongia stated that when the alleged Singer Cup incident took place in 1994 in Sri Lanka, he was occupying the adjoining room in the hotel and he never heard anything about that incident till it surfaced in the newspapers. He added, "I categorically state that Manoj Prabhakar never told me while in Sri Lanka or any time thereafter about this incident". He also stated before the CBI that he never came across any commotion etc. as a sequel to the alleged offer. He did not also recollect any journalist sitting in his room at that point of time. He first heard of this allegation when Shri I.S. Bindra made the said allegation on TV. Mongia's roommate Prashant Vaidya also never mentioned anything to him about the said incident.

200. In the statement recorded by me, Nayan Mongia added some further information regarding the events which took place and stated as under:

"We stayed in the said hotel, the name of which I do not recall now, for 15 days. During the said 15 days, Kapil Dev came to my room, when I was present there, only once. He was accompanied by one Kuri Ibrahim of TNQ Communications, Chennai who were advertising agents. Kuri Ibrahim is Chennai based. Kapil Dev told me that Kuri Ibrahim was agent for advertising for Four Square cigarettes and that they were willing to offer me an advertising contract for Four Square for a period of three years for a consideration, if I remember correctly, of Rs. 4 lakhs for the first and second years and about Rs. 6 lakhs for the third year and whether I was willing to accept it.

As Kapil Dev is a respected senior cricketer, I told him that whatever Kapil Dev suggested was agreeable to me. A small preliminary contract was signed by Kuri Ibrahim and myself on that day. The full-fledged contract was signed by us soon thereafter in Nagpur and I was given a copy of the contract. In 1997, the contract was renewed for a further period of three years and the consideration agreed upon was Rs. 15 lakhs in the first year, Rs. 15 lakhs in the second year and Rs. 16.5 lakhs in the third year. The contract is due to expire in December 2000. On that day, after finishing the talk in our room, Kapil Dev and Kuri Ibrahim went from my room, through the communicating door, to the room of Manoj Prabhakar and Navjot Singh Sidhu. Thereafter I did not hear any commotion etc., as mentioned earlier in my statement recorded by you today.

"I had mentioned this fact to the CBI also, but I find that it is not recorded in my statement. I do not know the reason therefor. All the same, I confirm that what has been recorded by the CBI regarding my not hearing any commotion etc., and the other facts in this regard are correctly recorded".

Back  Next

Mail Cricket Editor