CBI unveils cricket’s hall of shame — Azhar, Jadeja, Ajay Sharma, Prabhakar

The CBI, however, did not find any evidence against former Indian captain and coach Kapil Dev. Similarly, allegations of match-fixing against Nikhil Chopra and Nayan Mongia also found no evidence.

The 210-page report along with annexures prepared by the anti-corruption wing of the CBI under Special Director Gopal Achari is now ready to be handed over to the Youth and Sports Minister Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa.

The report says that Ajay Sharma and Prabhakar were the key players in the most shameful saga in India’s cricketing history. They began their life together at Ghaziabad. While Sharma was in touch with Indian bookies and players, Prabhakar took care of foreign bookies and players, the report says. So close were Sharma and Azharuddin that the former was authorised to operate Azhar’s locker at the Taj Palace Hotel. The CBI also traced Azhar’s Dubai bank account which he had concealed from the tax authorities.

However, it was the mobile phones which provided clinching evidence against the match-fixers. If Azhar made 60-odd phone calls in a single day to a bookie from his cellphone, Ajay Jadeja was found to have made 50 phone calls from his mobile phone to another bookie on another day.

Both players had refused to acknowledge to the CBI that they knew the persons they talked to on their mobile phones. Jadeja, when confronted by the CBI in the presence of the bookie, admitted reluctantly that he may have talked to him. His explanation to the CBI was strange: He said he was superstitious, and he had been told that if he talked on that particular number he would never be out. Jadeja made 94 in the match in question in the series against South Africa, which the CBI found was fixed. Jadeja had performed disastrously in the earlier two matches.

The bookie Mukesh Gupta confessed to the CBI that he had been active in the game till 1997 and later on settled down as a jeweller. He had nothing to do with match-fixing after 1997 and his `business’ was taken over by another bookie.

It was established during the course of investigations and detailed interrogation of bookies that Azhar, Jadeja, Sharma and Prabhakar not only tanked their own performances in crucial matches but also ensured that the other side also played ball with them.

Ajay Sharma, the report says, even fixed the Ferozeshah Kotla pitch for a Ranji Trophy match by paying of Rs 5,000 to a person. His performance in the match ensured him a berth in the Indian squad once again.

The CBI did not find any evidence against Navjot Singh Sidhu, who shared the room with Prabhakar. While Azhar, Jadeja, Sharma and Prabhakar were found to have assets disproportionate to their known sources of income, the CBI did not find anything against Nikhil Chopra and Nayan Mongia.

Former captain and coach Kapil Dev confessed to having some unaccounted money and gifts. Though he was in touch with the controversial South African businessman Banjo Qasim and had accepted a BMW car as a gift, the CBI did not find any evidence against Kapil Dev too.

The agency also found that the one-day international match between India and South Africa in Mumbai was fixed and the betting and fixing amount involved was stimated to be over Rs 300 crore.

The sensational 1996 World Cup match in Pune in which minnows Kenya upset giant Windies was also suspected to be fixed. But the CBI could not find any clinching evidence against an industrialist allegedly involved in fixing that match.

The CBI had sought time from Dhindsa in September to present the report but it was delayed as the minister was busy with the his son’s bye-election in Sunam. Later, the CBI informed Dhindsa that it wanted the report to be sent to legal experts before it was presented to the government. The report was sent to the Solicitor-General of India and another lawyer.

The CBI, though, is in a bind about the prosecution. Since cricketers are not public servants, it is examining how they can be prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CBI has even looked at the possibility of prosecuting Azharuddin and Ajay Sharma under the PC Act since Azhar served the State Bank of India while the other is still with the Central Warehousing Corporation.

However, legal experts differ feel that they cannot be prosecuted under the PC Act. Since no complaint of cheating or forgery has been registered and no loss to the state exchequer has been caused, a case cannot be made out, they say.