Tags:
Journalism of Courage
In a significant decision that could have far-reaching implications on Indian cricket administration, an arbitrator appointed by the Delhi High Court today quashed the five-year ban imposed on former Indian cricketer Ajay Jadeja for his alleged involvement in the match-fixing scandal and cleared him to play at both domestic and international levels.
The ruling is a stinging indictiment of the manner in which the Board for Control of Cricket in India (BCCI) tried and punished four top Indian cricketers in the wake of the match-fixing scam.
|
‘It’s good news, but now what about us?’
|
|
Manoj Prabhakar: I feel the same yardstick should be applied to the other cricketers who were banned by the BCCI. There cannot be a different rule for different people. Ajay Sharma: It’s a positive decision. Now there is hope for the others as well. Kapil Dev: I’m very happy to hear the news but I’m sad that it has come a month too late. He should have been in the World Cup squad |
‘‘I hold the report (by former CBI joint director K Madhavan, appointed by the BCCI) to be illegal and against the principles of natural justice and contrary to law and I set aside the same and also the findings of the disciplinary committee and ban imposed on Jadeja on December 5, 2000’’, the arbitrator, retired high court judge J K Mehra, said. The strongly worded decision was welcomed by his former colleagues Manoj Prabhakar, also serving a five-year ban, and M Azharuddin and Ajay Sharma, both of whom have been banned for life. Azharuddin is fighting the BCCI’s ban in a Hyderabad civil court and his lawyer, T Jagdish, said the hearing of the petition on the appointment of an arbitrator on the lines of Jadeja’s case has already been concluded. Azhar himself said he was delighted on hearing the ruling. However, he did not comment on the issue as ‘‘my case is sub-judice’’, saying only that he had ‘‘full faith in the judiciary’’. In theory, today’s decision makes Jadeja eligible for selection for the Indian team, though he’s passed the deadline for making the trip to SA. ‘‘Jadeja has a right to play domestic and international cricket at all levels as if the ban was not there, subject to his selection by the authorities’’, said Mehra, who took just a little over two months to give his ruling. The Madhavan report could not be relied on to punish the cricketer, Mehra said; it was biased, illegal and against the principle of natural justice on these grounds:
• No clear and definite charges
• Statements of witnesses were not provided to Jadeja for examination and cross-examination
• Madhavan’s failure to disclose that he was BCCI legal adviser
• His refusal to permit Jadeja legal assistance
• His close liason with the CBI without informing Jadeja
Jadeja had approached the HC on February 2, 2001 challenging the BCCI order imposed on the basis of the Madhavan recommendations following a preliminary report by the CBI indicting four ex-cricketers and Indian team physio Ali Irani. In his petition, Jadeja had also challenged the notice issued to him by the Sports Ministry asking him to show cause why the Arjuna Award given to him be not taken back, and sought quashing of the CBI report indicting him in the match-fixing scandal that erupted after the visit of the South African team headed by Hansie Cronje.
