Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The Abhijit Kale controversy got yet another twist on Saturday. For, even as the cricketer was presenting his case in Vizag before the BCCI Inquiry Commissioner DV Subba Rao, the Pune District Court ordered a stay on the lifting of the Board’s ban on his playing cricket.
In its appeal, the BCCI’s counsel pointed out that, under Clause 38 (vii) of the Board’s consitution (see box), Jagmohan Dalmiya had been right in disciplining Kale while ordering an inquiry. The immediate fallout of the stay is that Kale will not represent Maharashtra in the Ranji Trophy tie against Orissa from Monday. The cricketer, who was to have left for Cuttack, isntead returned to Pune from Vizag.
Kale’s lawyer Manoj Wadekar told The Sunday Express that he would decide on the next course of action after studying the order. He hinted at moving the High Court in Mumbai. If it is an appeal, it will have to wait till Monday, while a writ petition can be moved tomorrow.
|
Clause of contention
|
|||||
| The Kale case has swung on the basis interpretation of Art 38 (vii) of the BCCI’s constitution. This is the clause: Pending inquiry and proceeding into complaints or charges or misconduct or any act of indiscipline or violation of any rules and regulation, the concerned member, associate member, administrator, player, umpire, team official, referee or the selectors (including the privileges and benefits such as subsidies to the member or associate member) may be suspended by the president from participating in any of the affairs of the Board until final adjudication. However, the adjudication should be completed within 6 months. | |||||
In Vizag, Subba Rao announced that he had completed his hearings and would be ready to present the report in four days. Apart from Kale, Kiran More and Pranab Roy, the commission’s six-hour hearing had a third selector, Central Zone’s Sanjay Jagdale.
Rao said he had summoned Jagdale since the two selectors wrote to the commission that they had discussed the issue with him. Rao started off with a lengthy one-to-one with Kale, and then proceeded to interview the selectors before alowing the the cross-examination sessions. He ended with another round of one-to-ones with the parties.
‘‘There were one-to-one sessions with each of the four persons and there was also a cross examination session, though in a preliminary inquiry it is not always required,’’ said Rao. ‘‘All the parties were given an opportunity to present their case. Everything was recorded and also the transcripts were done. Now I will go through all the recorded statements and form my opinion. Then I will submit the report to the BCCI.’’ (With agency reports)
