The Mumbai Crime Branch said they wanted to know the legal provision under which the BCCI asked them to depute an officer before a two-man commission set up by the board to probe the role of IPL team officials in betting.
It also said that Gurunath Meiyappan,a Chennai Super Kings official and son-in-law of BCCI president N Srinivasan,had not yet been given a clean chit since they were still probing the ‘trail of information’ between him and umpire Asad Rauf.
Responding to BCCI allegations that the police did not cooperate with the board,crime branch officials said they had only acted in accordance with legal protocol.
Request to depute officer
On July 4 this year,the Crime Branch received a letter from the BCCI,which had formed a two-member panel to probe the allegations against Raj Kundra and Meiyappan. The letter dated June 28 said,”We request you to kindly depute an officer of rank who is conversant with the investigation along with the relevant records to be present on the 7th of July at the Hotel ITC Gardenia,Bangalore,so that the Commission can gather full details and record facts as found out by your department.”
Two days before the commission was scheduled to meet,the Crime Branch sent its written reply to the BCCI on July 5,which said,”As the case is still under investigation,you are requested to kindly quote relevant legal provisions under which the Investigating Officer or any other officer from the Investigating Agency can be called before the Probe Commission.”
Clarifying its stand,a senior Crime Branch officer said,”The investigating officer can only depose before a competent court. Had the BCCI asked for any kind of evidence,we could have shared whatever was possible.” The officer further said that while all evidence against Meiyappan pointed to betting,he had not been given a clean chit in the fixing aspect either. “Till we question Rauf,we cannot give clean chit,” said the officer. Gautam S. Mengle