Justice Chandrachud Committee Report (Part II)

1. The immediate cause of reference made to me by BCCI in the cover story which appeared in the Outlook magazine in its issue dated 11 June 1997, containing statements made by Manoj Prabhakar. The reference sets out those statements. However, in the interest of fullness. I consider it expedient to reproduce the various statements made by Manoj Prabhakar as reported in the cover story of the Outlook -- Those statements are as follows:-

(a) I distinctly remember the match at Sharjah in 1991 when I was at the crease with Sanjay Manjrekar, when we decided to walk off because of failing light. To our surprise we received the signal from the team management to play on.

(b) Unfortunately in situations where money deals are made in the dark and no proof is available we can only shake our head in disbelief. I noticed that such dealing seemed to be manipulated right from the top and the players who had reached the pinnacle, did not seem to be doing the right thing at crucial times.

(c) Somewhere in the same period I was also approached by certain quarters to perform below power in a certain match.

(d) Before the India-Pakistan match in Sri Lanka for the Single cup in 1994 I was offered Rs. 25 lakh by an Indian team member for sabotaging the match in Pakistan's favour. I was told to play belowe my usual standard. I told him to get out of my room. I told him that I would never do what he was telling me to do. Because of this I soon acquired that tag of a spoilsport in that group. This did not stop the offers though, which flows in regularly.

(e) There are times that things are so obvious, the entire nation has watched it happen. In Kanpur, when we were chasing the West Indies score, Mongia came into bet and conveyed The Management's instructions to try and get as close to the target. The resultant hullabaloo about my going slow should be directed at the team management and not me as I was doing so under their instructions. Infact due someone to else's fault, I was dropped and humiliated.

(f) Commercialisation of cricket has changed it's face it's no longer just a game; it's a game where money is the main motivator. Sponsors and bookies have started exerting pressure and games are now being increasingly fixed.

(g) I remember the incident at Sharjah when Aamir Sohail and Azhar went out to toss and both came back claiming that the other had won it.

(h) There are players who spend 5000 Dirhams on a suit. Some have fancy cars. Nobody gives those kind of things for nothing.

(i) Why approach a player or the team when you can get an explayer? You approach players only when you want to influence the game And its best influenced when you're chasing.

Besides the above said statements, Manoj Prabhakar is reported to have made the following statements:

(i) If I could ever reveal all that I have gone through and seen, you would see that in this hamam (bathroom) of Indian cricket almost everyone is naked. ("The Statesman" dated 10th June 1997)

(ii) At the time in question, when the incident had occurred, (Rs. 25 lakhs were allegedly offered by a team mate in Sri Lanka in 1994), I had informed the concerned persons and had then been told that I should play my game and that they would do the needful. (Letter dated 16th June 1997, to the Secretary BCCI).

(iii) The contents of the article (published in Outlook dated June 11, 1997) are correct.

(iv) I have come to know this now that the very people I had told (offer of Rs.25 lakhs), would probably have finished me. (Interview to Zee TV in the Aap Ki Adalat programme telecast on 15th June 1997 and also reported in The Statesman dated 15th June 1997).

(v) I do not want to hide. I do not want to hide anyone. I want to say that even if I blame these people, there will be no problem for them. (Interview to Zee TV and also reported in The Statesman dated 15th June 1997).

(vi) It is for the benefit of the country that I have raised this question. What do you want that I blame somebody and if I cannot prove it, will you fight my case? Either you say that we will follow you, we will back you up. I will take the names. I will take each and every name. (Interview to Zee TV in the Aap-Ki- Adalat programme telecast on 15th June 1997 and also reported in the Statesman dated 15th June 1997).

2. I find it very difficult to accept any of the aforesaid statements made by Manoj Prabhakar. First and foremost, there appears to be no plausible reason why he slept over such important episodes, for six years in one case and for three years in the other.

3. The incident mentioned in clause (a) above is falsified by the statement of Sanjay Manjerekar, which I accept as true. He says that the match at Sharjah against Pakistan in October 1991 started late. He and Manoj Prabhakar were on the right path when the umpire said that the light was bad. There was only a brief stoppage in the game. Manjrekar has stated categorically that he and Manoj did not go back to the Pavilion and the statement made by Manoj Prabhakar is wholly untrue. Manjrekar's statement accords with the probabilities of the case.

4.The incidents mentioned in clause (c) and (d) above are couched in a language which is beautifully vague. The incident mentioned in clause (c ) speaks of "certain quarters" having approached Manoj Prabhakar "somewhere" with a request that he should perform below par in "a certain match". The incident mentioned in clause ( d) speaks of Rs. 25 lakhs being offered to Manoj Prabhakar by an "Indian team member" for sabotaging the match in favour of Pakistan. He says that he spurned the offer but that did not stop the offers which flowed in regularly. Surely if an Indian team member approached Manoj Prabhakar with such a highly objectionable offer, the first thing which should have occurred to him was to report the matter forwith to the Manager or the Coach or the Captain or the vice-captain or any other member of the team in whom he had confidence.

5. The incident mentioned in clause (e) above refers to a match against West Indies. Nayan Mongia is alleged to have conveyed to Manoj Prabhakar the "Management's instruction to try and get as close to the target". Even here Manoj never claimed that he was victimised for carrying out the instructions of The Management. Nayan Mongia has said in his statement that he has never experienced the fixing of a match as a member of the Indian team. In fact he says that it is "crazy" that any player will make an attempt to lose a match.

6. The incident mentioned in clause (g) shows Manoj's total unconcern for truth. Aamir Sohail and Azhar were never captains of their teams at the same time or in any match whatsoever. They never tossed together. Azhar tossed with Imran Khan, Wasim Akram and Moin Khan but never with Amir Sohail. Apart from that, it is puerile for seasoned campaigners like Aamir Sohail and Azhar to proclaim within the seeing of a couple of commentators that the other had won the toss. Now, of course, the Referee is present at the toss but all along, a couple of commentators have always been present at an arm's length. The allegation made by Manoj in this behalf is so completely concocted that it deserves no further attention except that this allegation shows that Manoj has no regard for truth whatsoever. In his zeal for involving Azhar, Manoj overlooked that the Managers, the coaches and members of the two teams would not have been silent spectators to such an absurd claim made by their respective captains.

7. The target of allegation in clause (h) above is obviously Azharuddin. I do not know from where Manoj got the figure of 5000 Dirhams which is said to be the price of the suit. I will have occasion to point out later that the members of the Indian team are now paid so handsomely by the BCCI that a costly suit or an expensive watch can not be regarded as the offspring of a bribe.

8. It is not easy to understand what Manoj means by saying in clause in clause (1) above that it is better to approach an explayer than a current player of the team. In fact, this allegation destroys the other allegations made by him. On his own showing he was approached more than once with an offer of bribe. Why was that done, if the same result could be achieved more easily by getting an ex-player? It is not a happy thought, but the very persistence and tenor of the allegations made by Manoj tend to show that, rightly or wrongly, the alleged bribe givers entertained the belief that Manoj was the right person for paying a bribe to.

9. The statements made by Manoj which are extracted at (1)-(5) above are not of a different genre than those which are already dealt with. He told the Statesman that in the bathroom of Indian Cricket everyone is naked. This is too sweeping a statement to merit acceptance, apart from being bad in taste. Then he says in his letter dated 16th June 1997 to the secretary BCCI that he had informed "the concerned persons" about the offer of bribe of Rs 25 lakhs. It defies understanding as to why Manoj is afraid of disclosing the names even of those "concerned persons" , by which is evidently meant the officials of the board or the manager the captain and so on. There was surely no danger to his life in disclosing those names.

10. The fundamental objection of Manoj to disclosing the names of persons who offered him bribes or asked him to play below his form is that such a disclosure will spell danger to his life. He said in his statement before me that he was warned that his life will be in danger if he disclosed the names. I pleaded with him that he may dislose the names to me in confidence and that I will not mention those names in my report, much that he disclosed those names to me. Faced with this situation he changed his stance, an adroit player that he is and said that he is afraid that he will be sued or persecuted if he disclosed the names. With my humble experience at the bar and on the bench, I told him how unfounded his fear was. But he stuck to his crease for concealing those names. This indeed is an easy exercise. Make any unfounded allegations you like against team-mates, officials and others and then try to get away with it by saying that the names of the culprits cannot be disclosed because there is danger to life or the fear of litigation.

11. I have no hesitation in rejecting the allegations made by Manoj Prabhakar. They are imaginary and unrealistic. The question naturally arises as to why he should have resorted to tactics like these. The answer is provided by his own peers. According to them Manoj lost his equipoise because firstly, to quote his own words, he was " thrown out of the Indian team". That deprived him of the opportunity to make handsome gains by the use of his unquestioned cricketing talents. Secondly. he was then discarded by his own home team the Delhi District Cricket Association. That definitely unhinged him because, having been a hero of the crowds for quite some years, he was relegated into oblivion. From the admiring eyes of countless fans to a dark room is a fall too big to bear even for the most philosophical. He then tried to open a new leaf in his life by contesting an election to the Parliament. He rushed in where angels fear to tread and lost his wicket like a tail-ender. That was the last straw which broke the brave back.

Almost every player and Manager who was interviewed by me spoke of Manoj as an impulsive, indisciplined and aggressive individual. All those who said this added that there can be no doubt that there can be no doubt that he was a lion-hearted player who was always on the kill and did his utmost for the team. It is to be regretted that a player of Manoj's calibre was not able to curb his immature and uninformed impulses. Cricket made him an idol of the crowds. Everyone regarded him as a fine allrounder. It is tragic that he should have made untrue allegations which are calculated to dilute if not to destroy, the glorious uncertainity, the fun, the charm and the camaraderie of a great game. The greatest harm he has done is to his own image as a key player in the team. Cricket, I believe will take care of itself. It is too deeply rooted in our lives and too widely liked and loved to be damaged or destroyed by unexamined outbursts of misguided individuals.

13. One of the questions referred to me relates to an article published in "The Pioneer" in its issue dated 19th April 1997. Shri. Pradeep Magazine, the Sports Editor of Pioneer was interviewed by me.

14. Shri Pradeep Magazine has made the following statements in his article:-

a) A person who claimed to be from Delhi offered him Rs. 40 lakhs if he could get top players of the Indian team fixed for him.

b) He stumbled into this man at Jamaica Airport. They got friendly. They spent 2 evenings together and the talk veered around to betting. The man confessed he had been to Australia, to South Africa and to England even when India were not involved in matches there.

c) As the friendship grew, the man told him how some Indian players had made money by fixing matches and how bookies and betters were racking in the money by manipulating the odds. Mr. Magazine told him that he was very close to a few of the players. The man said- Can you get Sachin Tendulkar and I will give you 40 peties or buy you a house in a posh South Delhi locality. Shri. Magazine told him that he will try which pleased him so much that he made another offer to him like this: "I know it will take you time to get these players fixed for me. In the mean time, I want to benefit from your expertise. I'm going back to Delhi, would you let me know each day of the test match, what the weather is like, how the wicket is to behave and which team has a better chance to win. I will pay you for this. I agreed. He agreed to pay me Rs. 15,000 for each test and one-day match. He promised that the money would reach my home each day against phone calls. As phone calls came from Delhi, I did tell him conditions here and the money did reach my home.

d) The story is based on a personal experience which Shri. Magazine had with a bookie. (Letter dated 9th May, 1997, addressed to the Secretary,BCCI).

15. Shri. Pradeep Magazine said in his statement before me that when he mentioned the incident of the bribe for Rs. 40 lakhs to Sachin Tendulkar, Sachin got furious and said that he thought it beneath his dignity to even talk about such a thing. Shri. Magazine further said in his statement that the episode shows that at least the bookies believe that it is possible to fix a match through proper contacts. Though Shri. Magazine has further stated he would not be surprised if he came to know that some matches with India are fixed, he had "no evidence to show that any matches have been fixed".

16. The article of Shri. Magazine and the statement which he made before me show that it is quite possible that bookies try to get at players in whatever team. But then, one cannot ignore the healthy reaction of Sachin Tendulkar. I am inclined to hold that Sachin's reaction is representative of the reaction of the Indian players, by and large. Further, Shri. Magazine has not disclosed the name of the person who offered him Rs. 40 lakhs, though, on his own showing, he got friendly with him, spent two evenings with him and their talk veered around betting.

17. Shri. Pradeep magazine's story in the Pioneer cannot be discounted as untrue as since he has no reason to make up a false story. I did not get the impression when I was interviewing him that he was prevaricating or narrating an incident specially coined for the gullible reader. But what Shri. Magazine has said neither helps to identify the bookie nor involves any particular player or players in the Indian team. Shri. Pradeep Magazine has rightly said that the bookies, on their own part, believe that matches can be fixed. Fortunately, the belief of bookies does not determine the rules and regulations of an orderly life.

18. Thus, though Shri. Pradeep Magazine's article in the Pioneer may show that the bookies try to get at players, even Indian players, it is not possible to hold on the basis of that article that or the statement made by Mr. Magazine before me that any particular Indian player or players lay bets, participate in fixing matches or deliberately perform below their form and ability.

That disposes of question (a) mentioned in the Reference to which the answer is in the negative, namely that the allegations made by Manoj Prabhakar as published in "The Outlook" in its issue dated 11th June 1997 are not true.

19. The next three questions, (b), (c) and (e) relate to the allegation of betting and match fixing by any Indian cricketer, BCCI officials, team officials, journalists or any other persons as alleged in "The Outlook" dated 11th June 1997 and in the issue of "Pioneer" dated 19th April 1997.

20. The answer to these questions are provided in clear terms by the various players, managers and journalists. The best way of dealing with these questions is to extract the relevant part of the statements made by them before me.

I do not believe that matches are fixed or can be fixed. While playing the game of cricket, you never know what is in store for you, as you know in an examination, when you have read your books and answered the questions. There is no prescribed syllabus in a sport. There are surprises galore. Within my knowledge, no match has ever been fixed. I never got the feeling that any of my teammates deliberately played a bad shot to get out. Speaking for myself, I'm so made that I decide to take an occasional risk which works most of the time but fails occasionally. A batsman who can deliberately get out, would indeed be a super technician. He will use this expertise for playing well, rather than for getting out. We now make such handsome money merely by playing for the country , that it would be suicidal for any player to play badly deliberately. For example, between May 1996 and May 1997, we played 15 international matches for which each of us received a sum of about Rs 40 lakhs from the BCCI. I feel it impossible to believe that nay player would risk being dropped out of the team for deliberate bad play and lose not only the honour of playing for the country but the opportunity to earn so much money by lawful means.

I do not think that any match can be fixed. It has taken me fourteen long years to build up some reputation as a player. I cannot think of destroying it by playing badly with a deliberate motive.

I do not know if there is betting on cricket. But, I know this for certain that none of my team mates bet.

Matches are not fixed at all. I've been playing test cricket since November to December 1993. I came to know about the expression "fixing of matches" from newspapers only. As a member of the Indian team, I have never experienced it. The truth is that we are playing so much cricket these days, that there are more ups and downs in individual performance now than before. In 1996-97, we played 30-35 one-dayers and 11-12 test matches. We were away from home for about five months.

I think it crazy that any player will bet to lose. I have never heard even a whisper of it from any team mate. We spend years and years to train ourselves and are lucky to be selected in a national team. Then to think that we will bet to lose makes no sense. Thereby, we will ruin and sacrifice all that we have achieved.

We earn about Rs. 40 lakhs a year officially from the BCCI. In addition, we make quite some money in other lawful ways as in advertisements. There is no need to look beyond it. The team meets very often, we are together for long hours, we discuss our strategy, but never,never, is there even a whisper of fixing a match or of betting.

Fixing a match requires a great amount of homogeneity which is not to be found in a pronounced manner in our team. The team is composed of players from different parts of India and they have not much in common between them. It is not as if, we are not friendly to each other. But, we do not know each other so intimately that any one or two of us can take other players into confidence and fix a match. People watch the game of cricket for the thrill of its uncertainty. It is ironical that whoever does not do well, is presumed to be bought over and it is, as if the match is played by the bookies and not by us.

When you are included in a test team, you think only of your performance and not of money. Cricket is a religion in India and if the numerous spectators even suspect that a player takes a bribe to play badly, they will boycott him and destroy him and his family socially.

A match can be fixed by getting at the star players in the team. But, even tail-enders have turned the fortunes of a game as happened in the match which was played on 10th October 1997 between Pak and South Africa.

Some figures are interesting. A great player like Gavaskar, who scored 130 centuries in first class matches was out for a duck on 20 occasions. In his last match, Gavaskar needed only four runs to bid farewell with a century. But he was out for 96. That is exactly what happened to Sir Don Bradman, the greatest of us all.

I believe that people bet on cricket. But a player can make far more money by playing well and winning a match than by playing badly and losing a match. In fact, if a player has some class, he will bet to win, so that he wins the bet and makes additional money because of his performance. Our style of living has changed significantly which leads to various guesses and allegations. People think that we must be making money by illegal means, since we live so well. They do not know that the tax people us will not allow it to go unnoticed and that, we are paid handsomely as members of the team.

I do not think that in today's Indian team, there is any player who bets on the game. It is true that one time, friends used to have access to the players' enclosure and sometimes they used to speak on mobile phones. Now, mobiles are not allowed after we leave our hotel. No friends are allowed in the players' enclosure, much less in the dressing room. The dressing room is an exclusive place meant for the use of the players.

I was shocked, surprised and saddened to know of the allegation that some of our players are involved in betting of the game. I think that it is impossible to fix a match. In my fairly long experience, which has fortunately, not ended with my retirement from the game, I have never known that nay match was fixed. You cannot fix a match by buying over a couple of players. The fifth wicket partnership of Azhar and Jadeja of about 230 runs in the one-day match at Sri Lanka was a fantastic performance.

Some people are firing shots in a dark room to hit someone. But, there is no one in the room. So the shots only damage the room. That room is Indian cricket. Today, it is a dark room because we are not in a winning streak. When we win, there are lights here, lights there and lights everywhere. I feel that the allegations of betting and match fixing are being made today because we are not good enough to win at the present moment, for whatever reason. Anyway, if Manoj Prabhakar had a story up his sleeve, he could have approached his captain, vice-captain, coach or team manager which he never did. I do not believe his story.

In my entire career as a player, I was never approached by anyone for match fixing. I guess that there is large betting on cricket but, the evil of betting can be dealt with only by the Police. Today, there is so much betting that there is so much betting also. Those who lose their bets are the first to blame the players for playing deliberately.

Fixing a match does not mean fixing all the players in the team. It is possible to approach a couple of star players and fix a match. A player can be approached only for playing badly because not even a Don Bradman or a Sunil Gavaskar could claim that he will score a century. A player can only promise that he will get out cheaply. But in my experience no match was fixed.

Many players try to get friendly with players to increase their importance. They are the ones who circulate all kinds of stories. But, it cannot be denied that they offer gifts to players. They also try to get information from the players on the basis of which, I guess, they may be laying bets.

If they win, they would go back to the player and offer a gift saying that they have won a bet because of the information given to them.

I am of the opinion that the Board should set up a private agency to find out the assets of the players. That will give some clue whether players lay bets or agree to fix matches.

During my long term as a manager and even a longer term as a player, I never suspected that any player was involved in betting. But, as a Manager, I felt that the priorities of the players were all wrong. They attended too many parties and mixed with too many outsiders just to keep their own allowances intact. Their attention is not all focussed on the game of cricket. I, therefore, framed a code of conduct regarding dress, net practice, general discipline and the need to hold discussions. Thereafter, in England, we won 14c out of 21 matches, three were drawn and only four were lost during my managership. While I was captain, we won 3 out of 4 series. At one stage, I wanted to relax the Code, but the players themselves said no to it. They said the code is excellent and it works.

There is no betting by any Indian cricketer. It is out of the question. They are so well paid that they do need any money.

The episode of offer of Rs.25 lakhs narrated by Manoj Prabhakar has no foundation in fact. I was the manager of the team at that time. But, he did not tell me a word about it. Besides, it was raining for three days before the match and the match was never played. Even the replay was washed out.

These days, players make a lot of money. People are probably not aware that Azhar has a contract of Rs.50 lakhs with Pepsi, Sachin has a contract running into crores with Worldtel, Kumble has a contract Rs.20 lakhs, Siddhu has a contract of Rs.20 lakhs, Rahul Dravid has a contract of Rs.30 lakhs for the stickers of Wills on his bat and so on. I believe that Azhar has also a contract with Reebok for Rs.40 lakhs. According to me, Azhar is basically a simple person but he is friendless. Some undesirable persons have invaded the cricket field and have ruined it by playing politics.

Finally, I would like to say that though the members of the Indian team are not unfriendly to each other, very few of them are close and intimate. Differences in language, culture, religion and food habits make the Indian team not easy to manage. A team with such diverse attitudes can not either be fixed by anyone.

I had never heard of the word match fixing while I was in the team. It was a matter of great pride and honour for me to play for my country. We always played to win. I played actively from 1976-1992.

Knowing the Indian team, it seems to be impossible that any of our players can be purchased to perform badly. The achievement of scoring a large number of runs in a representative match has no substitute. I believe that you can not fix a match unless you get at least five or six players in your trap. Even two or three good players can not fix a match. People may have forgotten that Srinath and Kumble won for India the Titan cup against Australia by playing brilliantly as tail-enders. The umpires play a large part in the fortunes of the game. I believe that for fixing a match, even the umpire may have to be fixed. What people must not forget is that even the best of players go through a lean patch.

I do not have any first hand knowledge about betting on cricket matches. It is only during the last four years that I have heard stories about betting on cricket. But, even then, I have never heard any stories about betting from any of my team mates. As a member of the team, I never even suspected that there was betting on cricket or any of my team mates were involved in it. My test career began in 1987.

As regards match fixation, cricket is a team game of 11 players. It is not possible to influence all of the 11 players through one or two players by bribing them. Even one failure for a batsman like me, with lakhs of people watching the game, means much more than getting out deliberately on payment of a bribe.

The statements made by Manoj Prabhakar are wholly untrue.

It is well know that matches have been won by tall-enders often times. Chetan Sharma won the game for us by scoring a century in the MRF World Series at Kanpur. That makes match fixing difficult to believe.

It seems to me that there is betting on cricket. However, I am not aware of any cricketer, past or present, being involved in betting. I was a manager of the team twice, first in 1986 and then in 1991. I retired from my test career in 1978. In my opinion, no cricketer worth his salt will entertain the thought of selling himself at the cost of the country's honour. The price of the Indian Test-cap cannot be measured in terms of money because; it is bought with tears and sweat. My father, Vinoo Mankad who was one of the greatest players of his time, used to say that the grass on the cricket field is grown with the sweat of the cricketers.

The statements made by Manoj Prabhakar are wholly untrue and unfounded. He should not be afraid of disclosing the names of his teammates who offered the bribe to him. He has defamed the entire cricket fraternity with his unwarranted remarks. The Sharjah Match of which he speaks did not take place at all. Besides, it was an inconsequential match since India had reached the finals.

I captained the Indian team at Adelaide in 1958. I was the manager of the team, which toured Pakistan in1989. I was chairman of the selection committee for seniors for four years and for juniors for four years. I was the vice-captain of the team and have toured all cricket-playing countries as a player.

Though I retired a long time back from first-class cricket, I am still in touch with the game. I take active interest in the game, meet many players, old and new, and exchange thoughts with them. Not one person has ever told me that any member of the cricket team takes a bribe to play badly. No one has ever told me that Indian matches are fixed. I follow the game closely even today and my experience belies the story that any cricket match is fixed. The story of Manoj Prabhakar seems to be impossible to believe.

I played as a member of the Indian team from 1979 to 1986. I was a cricket coach for the Indian team from 18th March 1986 to Sept. 1996. Our team played as Singapore for six days, for one week at Sharjah, for 70 days in England, for 10 days in Sri Lanka and for 10 days in Toronto. I assisted Ajit Wadekar in Nov.1995 with the New Zealand home series and I was coordinator during the world cup series, which ended on 17th March 1996.

I have seen one of the leading players in the Indian team talking on the mobile phone right through the tour for long periods like 20 minutes from the balcony of the Lords dressing room. I wrote to the board that players should not be allowed to take mobile phones with them once they leave the hotel. My suggestion was readily accepted. I had also complained to Mr. Jagmohan Dalmia that I suspected two persons, one of them a player and other closely connected with him, were leaking important information to the press. I was also unable to understand why Dr. Ali Irani was allowed to attend the team meetings on the eve of the match or at any time.

I have experienced that the press knew the composition of the team before the team was officially declared.

There can be betting on cricket on the basis of information leaked to the bookies. But, my long experience shows that no Indian player has ever laid a bet to loose a match. It has never happened and I am sure that it'll never happen in the future. People are given to talk loosely. Such rumours began to rise with the introduction of the mobile phones and with at least one of the key players talking on the mobile from the balcony of the dressing room. Those who saw that drew the inference that the player concerned was talking to some suspicious characters. Such and inference is natural but I do not think that the inference is justified. I repeat that no Indian player will ever bet to loose a match. As the present editor of a fortnightly called 'Shatkar', I am still in very close touch with the game. On the basis of my experience I reject the allegation of match fixing.

I was the manager of the Indian team, which toured West Indies from Feb-May 1997.

Cricket is a game of uncertainty. Situation of sudden collapse of a team arises quite often. In a one-day match in West Indies, we had a target of 267 runs to achieve. We were 230 for three wickets down. We lost 7 wickets for thirty runs and lost the match by 16 runs. In the Barbados test, we wanted 121 runs to win but we were all out for 80 runs. All the players uniformly complained that the wicket was too bad to play.

Players do have many visitors but never in the dressing rooms and generally not in the players enclosure. Occasionally a very personal friend of a player sits in the player's enclosure. I have not seen such persons speaking on mobile or looking very informed.

My experience bellies the allegation of match fixing in Indian cricket. You have to take at least two key batsmen and two key bowlers in confidence to bet to loose a match. Players are on friendly terms with each other. But I have never seen any intimacy between them, which could enable them to conspire to obtain a particular result. They share accommodation but the players rotate and the same players will not share one room all through the tour.

The talk of match fixing and betting started when we began to loose matches. When we were on a winning streak, there was no such talk. The emergence of a brilliant young player like Jayasurya caused our defeat in many games and with it the talk of match fixing started. It is difficult to contain a batsman like Jayasurya. I fact, in respect of our own great opener K Srikant, Allan Border had said, "Bowl anywhere you like. He will hit you anywhere he likes." Unfortunately at this moment, the Indian team is not adequately equipped to perform well. We have no Lala Amarnath, Vinoo Mankad, Chandu Borde, Bapu Nathkarni, Saleel Durani or Eknath Solkar. Our players are very young and seem to be playing with the fear that if the fail they will be out. I find that the team lacks a sense of commitment, which is necessary for winning matches. From the Prudential cup 1983 to 1987-88, we were in the winning streak under Kapil Dev. No one talked of match fixing then. I do not believe that there is any match fixing in Indian cricket or any Indian player bets to loose a match.

I have been working as a physiotherapist with the Indian team since 1987, when the reliance World Cup was played. The only occasions when I did not go with the team as a physiotherapist were to West Indies and Pakistan in 1989 and to New Zealand at about the same time. It is impossible that any of the Indian matches can be fixed or any of our players can be got at. There is just no possibility of one player in the Indian team influencing another player or other players. When the Indian team won the series against England, West Indies and Sri Lanka between 1993-94 people started saying that West Indies took money and lost matches. People are generally prone to forming opinions after hearing the TV commentary. That is why they talk the same way. If the TV were made mute, very few people will be able to say or write any thing original. Cricket is not a sport but a religion.

Sachin Tendulkar cannot accept defeat. He takes his cricket as one takes to religion and he is the right person to lead the team.

Psychologically, people are compulsive gamblers. There are some who consult an astrologer on such piffling things as the number of nails on shoes, the colour of the pants or the size of a neck chain.

It is worth while inquiring as to how much amount can possibly be paid to a player for purchasing him to play badly. Today, the players get Rs.90,000/- for playing one-day matches and Rs.1.25 lakhs for playing a test. You have to pay bribes according to the worth and the status of the bribe-taker. The players make 38 to 40 lakhs or rupees per year. How much can you the pay them? Rahul Dravid has a contract of Rs.50 lakhs with Pepsi but such contracts can be entered in to and maintained as long as you are in the team.

The outburst of Manoj Prabhakar is unfounded. He is by and large a friendless person.

Betting on cricket takes place heavily in India. It has been there for about 10 years. It has assumed a large proportion since the introduction of one-day games. There is heavy betting on oneday matches because they are result oriented. I cannot identify any particular player, who bets on cricket but I ma fairly certain that members of the team do lay a bet, "and one can only bet to loose." It is easy to get run-out or hit a lofted shot. Coaches can detect a deliberate under performance and so can the students of the game. We may have lost some matches because some of our players laid bets to lose.

Matches can be and are fixed but they can be fixed only for losing, not for winning. No one can fix a match for winning it.

From Sept. 1996 to Sept. 1997, each of the 14 players in the team, including the coach must have earned over Rs.50 lakhs, which consist only of what the board plays them. When the team goes abroad, they get a daily allowance of 50 US $ per day. They do not spend that money. They have a large number of fans; some of them are highly placed and invite them for dinners. But, I can say that the Indian team is a very disciplined, well-behaved lot of players, most of whom live within their means.

The Board cannot do anything about disproportionate assets of the players. But I have a feeling that one or two players have acquired disproportionate assets. Out of the logo money, the board keeps 40 per cent and distributes 60 per cent equally among the players. Manoj Prabhakar wanted more money to be paid to the senior members of the team. He was dropped not only from the Indian team but he was not even include in his home Delhi team. The story which he gave to OUTLOOK is not true.It only shows his deep sense of frustration.

I am the sports correspondent of Sanj Loksatta. In 1993, I covered the test match between India and England. Anyone could enter the dressing room and I saw some shady characters hovering around the dressing room. One of such persons is alleged to have been arrested under TADA.I It's wrong to allow access to any person to the dressing room.

The statements made by Manoj Prabhakar in ":Outlook" magazine are false. I have been a close follower of cricket since 1965 but I cannot think of any match which was fixed.

I am of the opinion that the fees paid to the players should be linked with the performance as in Sri Lanka. If that is done there would be no possibility of a match being fixed.

The statements made by the other journalists read thus:

Q. Mr Aniruddha Bahal, Outlook Principal correspondent.

A cricket match can be fixed. The results of the international matches are in the present times so close that it is enough to fix a few key players. It is not necessary to fix all the 11 players. The match can be fixed not merely by bookies even punters can fix a match. Corruption is a matter of individual susceptibility. A player who has scored a half century has performed well for outward purposes but he may have scored those runs in twice the number of balls when his potential is that he can score 50 runs in 60 balls. Thus, it is difficult to find fault with him by saying that he was involved with any bookie or punter.Many permutations and combinations are involved in good and bad play, that is, a bowler can bowl a few overs very well and then slide off, similarly, the batsman or the wicketkeeper.

It is true that the report in our magazine outlook regarding the match, of which Mr Prabhakar has spoken, never took place.Even the adjourned match which was to be replayed did not take place. That does not mean that Prabhakar's story is baseless.The reason is that bets would be laid or the money can be offered when it was not known or anticipated that the match will not be played. There is a huge amount of betting in the sub continent. In my opinion, there is a lot of betting on cricket in India.Indian players may also be laying bets which does not necessarily mean that they have laid those bets for fixing the match. But, if a player lays a bet, he would naturally adjust his play so that he can win that bet. No one lays a bet to loose it. The fact that Indian players earn a higher amount legally through the board does not mean that they would not be interested in making more money. Its not every good player who makes large money in advertisements or in TV modeling. There are just one or two of that kind. Therefore, the others could well be tempted to make money which is a human trait.

Whatever I have to say on match fixation or the particular matches which were fixed is stated in the article in our magazine "Outlook". What we could say openly has been stated by us. Things which can not be published without good evidence have not been published by us.

(Mr Bahal showed me a letter and a note suggesting match fixing by Indian cricketers.The said letter says that "Lots of bits and pieces of information" was received but was not actionable. The letter says that "very peripheral information" was received from " various sources". "If we had any basis we would have looked for proof." The note speaks of a letter by which information was handed over to a revenue secretary, and the letter could be found of the record of the revenue department. Paragraph 3 of the note says that the gentleman with whom the writer had a talk could not remember the names regarding the involvement of four players who alleged to have been paid of before a match in Sharjah.)

My information tends to show that there is a company in Singapore which organise Singer Cricket tournament behind the scene and that, an Indian board official was a beneficiary of the proceedings along with three other persons who are closely linked with cricket, one of whom is from Pakistan.

R. Mr Krishna Prasad, Outlook co-correspondent

Cricket is a subject of my study. I have personal motive in writing the article which appeared in Outlook. I do not say that every international Indian cricket match is fixed. Only some matches are fixed. Outlook has not made any insinuation against any board official even when matches are fixed not every cricketer is involved in match fixing. Though betting on cricket is legalised in England and Australia and partly in Sri Lanka , it is frowned upon. It is considered improper to bet.

The board should ask for a declaration from the players of the assets. That may perhaps be too generic. But, one does not know why the board did nit try to find whether the assets of some players are wholly disproportionate to their known source of income.

Manoj Prabhakar has brought in the forefront the virus which is eating into the vitals of Indian cricket. Since March 1996, Indian cricketers have been earning large amounts by way of fees. Even then, the assets held by some players are staggering. It is impossible to obtain and furnish proof in black and white of illegal payments made to players. Those who make such payments are highly placed individuals.

A tremendous amount of betting takes place in cricket. Dubai and Karachi have the biggest cartels.

All types of queer characters sit in the players' box and have access to the dressing room. Betting takes place not merely on the final result of the match. There can be betting on the toss, runs scored by a player, catches taken and dropped, the total runs which the team scored and so on.

S. Mr. Lokendra Pratap Sahi Sports Editor, The Telegraph

I think it is possible to fix an international cricket match involving any team. If you watch the matches closely, you will find that some matches take a cetain turn either with the fall of one wicket or even after a couple of overs only. There are some runouts which cannot be explained and 2-3 players are getting out one after the another.Shots which they play are such as they should nothave been played in that situation. Some time you find that some bowlers concede as many as 40-50 runs in three overs. Thus the question arises as to why such a thing has happenned?

It is not fair to assume that all matches are fixed or that all players in any particular match are fixed. It cannot be that everyone in the team is fixed. It is the players who are crucial to the side who can be fixed. Like an opening bowler, a key player or even a wicket keeper. That possibility is always there. When a match is fixed only one player is never fixed. It may be 2-3 crucial players who are fixed may get out. By getting out they have done their job. That is say they have done whatever was expected of them or asked of them. If the others pull out the match and the side does well, that is bad luck for the bookies. The bookies will not go for the fringe players in that case their element of risk will increase. The bookies will always have the key players as his target. That is what i believe.

I have been with daily Telegraph for 15 years. I am its Sports Editor for past five years. I have toured with the Indian team about 20 times, There was a one-day match between India and West Indies,at Kanpur in 1994. I did not cover that. I sent one of my colleagues to cover it. The way Manoj Prabhakar and Nayan Mongia batted shocked everyone. The reports which appeared in the newspapers next day almost unanimously doubted the integrity of these two players. That is because, in one day match, they were batting as if they were playing in a test match. That is the first time i thought that there is some truth in the allegation that players are involved with bookies. After that match, both Prabhakar and Mongia were dropped out for the next two matches. That was obviously by way of punishment. The general feeling was that their omission from the next two matches had everything to do with their involvement with the bookies.

In early 1995 I went to Sharjah. But before that there was a tournament in New Zealand in which India took part. When the Indian team returned the Indian Express carried a story on the front page quoting the Manager of the Indian team which had toured New Zealand, that the Indian team had six blacksheep. That story talked about matches being fixed. For two days after the story, there was no comment from the board. On the third day the manger issued the statement from Vishakapatnam saying that he was misquoted by the paper and that he had not given any information to the Indian Express. The story in the Indian Express had quoted the manager. Since the story in the said paper was not denied immediately by the board or the Mnager i think that there must have been some truth in the report. It is a queer coincidence that the Salim Malik episode occured almost at the same time in which Shane Warne and two other Australian players alleged that S. Malik had offered them a bribe to ensure that Australia lose the match.

After the Kanpur and New Zealand incidents, the public started feeling and became more convinced that there must be some underhand dealing between the players and the bookies.

In 1996, India played in Sahara cup at Toronto. I did not cover that tournament. Therefore, I cannot say what happened during that tour. But I was told by some people in Calcutta after the first match that the first four matches in Toronto were fixed, that the result will be two all and that, the fifth match will be played on merit. As a coincidence, that is exactly what happened. For that, both the teams had to cooperate and some players in the Pakistan team may also have cooperated.

Recently , in some matches, the performance of some members of our team has been shocking and far below expectations. While on circuit, I felt that some players were just not bothered in respect of their own poor and overall failure of the team. It seemed to me as if they were not bothered about it. The fat allowance paid to the Indian players is a recent phenomenon for the last 5-7 years. It is the key player who is targeted by the bookies. He has no fear. Even if he performs poorly for 3-4 matches, he will still be in the team. Being dropped from the team, is what can happen to a fringe player for bad performance but, the bookies never target them. The bookies invest in a player who will be in the team even after 3-4 bad performances. Therefore, a key player does not have much stake in being involved with the bookies for some time at least. After 3-4 bad performances, he may do extremely well and again become a hero before the public. Public memory is very short and if a key player makes a century or takes some wickets, his immediate past poor performance is forgotten by the public.

The bookies target players in important matches where betting stakes are enormous as in matches with Pakistan, West Indies, South Africa , Australia and now Sri Lanka . In key matches, especially with Pakistan, the betting can run into crores of rupees. In England and South Africa, betting on cricket is legalised. In England, there are Lad-broke stalls at all test match centres where any one can bet openly. The odds are publicly displayed on the board at those centres.

The Salim Malik incident took place in February 1995. Five months later, in July 1995, the International Cricket Council , which is the Governing body for cricket, outlawed betting and gambling in the Code of Conduct which has to be followed by every player and official. In fact, one clause was added to the code of Conduct. Clause 9 of the ICC Code of Conduct was added in July 1995 which provides, inter alia, that players and team officials shall not engage, directly or indirectly in betting, gambling or any form of unofficial speculation on the outcome of any cr4icket match.

I would like to emphasise that it is the key players who are fixed and the key matches. There is no question of fixing a fringe player nor can you fi all players. No bookie would be interested in fixing a match which is unimportant. I am not prepared to say that every player in the team is involved. All I can say is that a couple of key players can be involved. What is important is that a member of the Indian team may place a bet on the result of the match, though he cannot do so because of Code of Conduct. What is important and objectionable is the possible involvement with the bookie and the deliberate poor performance. A player in a team can supply more information to a bookie on the composition of the team, an unpublished injury to a player, which is only known to the team, or state of the wicket. Mobile phones were banned in Pakistan in 1994-95 by the then Manager Inthikhab Alam. The then Indian Manager, Sandeep Patil also banned mobile phone in August 1996. The question naturally arises, why?

Conduct Clause 9 of the ICC Code of Conduct was added in July 1995 which provides, inter alia, that players and team officials shall not engage, directly or indirectly in betting, gambling or any other form of unofficial speculation on the outcome of any cricket match. I would like to emphasise that it is the key players who are fixed and the key matches. There is no question of fixing a fringe player nor can you fix all players. No bookie would be interested in fixing a match which is unimportant. I am not prepared to say that every player in the team is involved,. All I can say is that a couple of key players can be involved. What is important is that a member of the Indian team may place a bet on the of the match though, he cannot do so because of Code of Conduct. What is important and objectionable is the possible development with the bookies and the deliberate poor performance. A player in a team can also supply more information to a bookie on the likely composition of the team, an unpublished injury to a key player, which is only known to the team, or state of the wicket. Mobile phones were banned in Pakistan in 194-95 by the then manager Intikhab A lam. The then Indian manager, Sandeep Patil also banned mobile phones in August 1996. The question naturally arises, why?

T. Bipin Dani - Free lance Sports Journalist: I say that cricket matches can be fixed. There cannot be smoke without fire. I believe that international Indian cricket matches are fixed. Newspaper reports say that bookies have been arrested. It cannot be false that they are not involved. The bookies will not take bets unless they involve cricketers. Fixing up a match means setting at a few good players. Each and every match cannot be fixed. A match can be fixed by contacting key players. The key players are asked to tell the other players to perform poorly. I have no evidence in support of what I have stated. However, there are some circumstances, which support my statement. Rashid Latif had said that four Indian cricketers used to inquire with him on telephone about climatic condition, wicket condition etc. Latif denied this allegation immediately. However he did not send his denial to the outlook magazine but sent it to Azharuddin.

T. Balasaheb.J.Pandit

I do not believe that any International Indian Cricket match is fixed. I also do not believe that any Indian player in such matches takes part in fixing the match or in betting. I had toured with the Indian team in 1971, 1974, and in 1979 to England. I had also gone to Sri Lanka in 1974 and to Sharjah in 1987, when the Indian team played there. I have covered about 30 test matches on All India Radio and for newspapers. I came into very close contact with the players, especially because in England, I used to live in the same hotels they lived. I came into personal contact with the players. I never suspected that there was any match fixing or any betting by any Indian player. I may site an example, which is very telling. At Oval in Sur-people began to see something evil in the defeat of India. The truth is that Pakistan won because Ijaz played magnificently. The players do not take part in fixing matches because their whole reputation and livelihood are at stake.

U. R.Mohan- The Hindu

I consider it impossible that the International Match can be fixed. As many as 11 players are involved in the play and what is more important, the national prestige is at stake. I have heard many market rumours about match fixing. But during my 18 years as a Cricket Correspondent with the Hindu, I do not know a single instance when I heard before the match or during the match that some particular player or players are going to play badly. These rumours, I found are unfounded and they are circulated after the match is over. A team, which loses, is accused of having fixed the match to lose. I have no personal knowledge but. It is widely believed that a large amount of betting takes place on cricket in India. In some other countries, like England and Australia, betting is legalised. Cricket is an unpredictable game because fluctuations in the form of a player or a team are very common. That is why unusual results are produced in any cricket match between any two countries. Any cricket match can produce a shocking result. When a shocking result is produced. Rumours begin to float. The match with Pakistan in the Singer cup in 1994 at Colombo about which Manoj Prabhakar has spoken to thereby, there was a betting lounge where the telephone was buzzing all the time and bets could be led lawfully. I never found a single Indian player in that enclosure. The Managers and the Coaches were men of integrity who would have never allowed any match fixation or betting by the players. The character of the Indian players is reflected in the fact that when three of our players had offers to play in the Packer circus world series cricket in Australia, they refused the offer because, accepting the offer would have meant that they cannot play for their own country. People tend to believe involvement of players in betting because of some unusual events, which happen during the course of the match. For example, in the match between India and Pakistan at Sharjah, Pakistan required six runs to win and there was only one ball to go. Everyone was saying that Pakistan is going to win, even before the match had started. Javed Miandad hit a six off the last ball and Pakistan won the match. People began to say that the Indian bowler deliberately bowled a full toss. This is unjustified because, it is not easy to hit a six even on a full toss. Cricket is a game involving tremendous amount of human element. There is uncertainty in the game until the last ball is bowled. That may encourage betting but that does not show that players lay bets to lose a match. To take another illustration, when India and Pakistan won one match each in Pakistan. The result of the series depend on the last match. Pakistan won because Ijaz Ahmed played extremely well and scored about 135 runs.The match with Pakistan in the Singer cup in 1994 at Colombo, about which Manoj Prabhakar has spoken to Outlook, never took place. In fact, it was raining for quite a few days before the match was due to be played. The nature of the game is such that any side may win or lose. No one ever thought that Kenya would beat West Indies in the World Cup Championship, which was held in 1996. Our match with West Indies in which we had to score only 120 runs to win was lost because the wicket was difficult and suited the West Indies fast bowlers. I have gone about five time out of India with the Indian touring team from 1979 to 1997. Not once did I suspect that any match was fixed or that any player had placed a bet for losing the match

V. Mr.S.K.Shyam

I have been writing in various newspapers for the last 30 years. I was a Sports Editor for nearly 26 years for three different newspapers. I have covered 126 test matches, to which India was a party and I have also covered about 100 one day matches. I have traveled a lot for viewing and commenting on cricket. Some times, the future of a match changes so suddenly that it creates doubts in the minds of people about the bona fides of the players. People jump to the conclusion that the match is lost because the players are got at. But sports critics like us have to look into these problems and try to analyse the likely causes of the result. After a most careful consideration, I have come to the conclusion that it is not only difficult but impossible to fix a match through the medium of one or two players. In one day cricket, even one or two failures of key batsman do not matter. The others can make up for it, which has happened very often. For fixing a match, one will have to get at a large bunch of players, which is extremely difficult to do. Players are known to have played badly, deliberately on a few occasions. But, that is because of internal rivalries, especially some animus against the Captain. I have come across people who boast of their friendship with players. They exploit that friendship by spreading rumors like that they placed a certain bet on behalf of that player. It is very difficult to separate the facts from fiction. No player would risk his whole career by being directly involved in an illegal activity like betting on cricket. My own experience is that the key players who have worked so hard to get into the team and to retain their form, will not sell themselves because they also consider it a great honour to represent their country. I am of the opinion that in the interest of this great game of cricket, people cannot be allowed to pass off or masquerade as journalists. Those people never cover any match in detail but manage to go on a tour abroad to cover a series. Thereby they get privileges of a journalist like sitting in the Press Box where all telecommunications are very easily available. I have seen that the only business of these people is to receive and make telephone calls. At the end of the day, they hardly write a line on the cricket of the day. The entry to the journalists box should be subjected to close scrutiny so that only genuine and established journalists will have access to the press room. That will effectively reduce the rumors about the journalists being involved in betting

W. Pradeep Vijaykar, Asst. Editor- Sports- Times of India, Bombay.

I have gone twice to Sharjah and recently to Toronto and Pakistan when the Indian cricket team was touring. I do not rule out the possibility of fixing an international cricket match. That can be done by getting at say, two key players. If the others play well, the fixing may fail. But, where the fixing has been attempted, 50% of the times one may succeed in fixing the match. Punters do not always win the bet. They take their chance and bookies seldom lose because they hedge their bets. Therefore, a failed attempt in fixing a match does not hit the bookies. I have watched the Indian team closely for the last 20 years and I have seen today's players growing from their early beginnings. I do not think that they would take money for losing a match. There may be a stray case here or there by way of an aberration. There are temptations in all walks of life and, some times, some players find it difficult to resist it. The test match which Pakistan lost against Zimbabwe in about 1993 has all the trappings of a fixed match. In some foreign countries where betting goes on lawfully on a large scale on cricket, winners of bets are not even paid their moneys. The bookies just do not part with the money. Because of the betting rumors, it has become difficult to cover a match because, if any side loses, the general public suspects match fixing. It is very hard to swallow that our players will take a bribe or bet to lose a match. Cricket cannot be compared to horse racing where mafias rule the roost. In places like Sharjah where money power plays a large part, there can even be pressure on Umpires in fixing a match. Some times, even umpires seem to give decisions, which shock the spectators and the competitors alike.

X. Pradeep Magazine, Sports Editor- Pioneer, Delhi

I have gone on all major cricket tours abroad. In the last couple of years, there is a tremendous amount of talk in the Press Box and outside about a large amount of betting. I have myself seen people sitting in the Press Box and talking on mobile phones to outsiders on the state of wicket and the likely result of the match. These phone calls used to come and go every few hours to up date the information. This and other news like a bookie being thrown out from a Press Room in Sharjah led to further rumors that there is a communication between players and the bookies. The news which appeared in the newspaper about the Sharjah incident was in 1993-94. In 1983, when Kapil Dev was the captain of the Indian team, I had written an article in the Indian Express dated 17th December 1983, saying that Kapil Dev had said to me that the Indian team was interested more in making money than in playing the game. My article led to some controversy. But the important point is that Kapil Dev had not said anything about fixing a match or about betting. He was saying something about players who were interested in gifts more than in playing the game. Kapil Dev later on contradicted even that statement after a few days.

Y. H.Natarajan, Sports Editor- Indian Express

I have been working in the Indian Express for the last 17 years. There can be no smoke without fire. There should be some truth in the rumor about the match fixing and the betting. But I have no evidence with me on either of the questions. I cannot say that any particular match was fixed or that, any particular player in the Indian team bets. What I can say is that in 1994-95, when I was in Sri Lanka at the same time of the Singer Cup Series, a Pakistani photographer with whom I was sharing a room said to me that lots of allegations and counter allegation are being made in the Pakistani Dressing Room about the spectacular match of Australia vs. Pakistan. Salim Malik was the Captain of the Pakistan team. I had heard a few things about our players but it would not very unfair on my part to mention their names because I have no evidence. Some players have made allegations against other players but even then I thought that our players against whom allegations were so made, had an unimpeachable character. It is surprising that such allegations were made by different players at different times, evidently unrelated to each other. But, I still do not believe those allegations. For fixing a match, it is quite enough to get at two key bowlers and batsmen. Managing a run out is not very difficult. But, it is very difficult to say without any concrete evidence that Indian matches are fixed or any particular match was fixed. When strange things happen on the field, suspicion is naturally aroused. Coupled with the established fact of large betting, such incidents then tend to give credence to match fixing allegations. The umpire can also be a key figure in match fixing, though it is not known way of doing it. I do not know whether that is prevalent. But I can say that an Indian international umpire told me once that he was offered money to give certain decisions. But all these allegations depend on the oral word and there is no concrete evidence. In the absence of such evidence, it would be unfair for me to make any positive statement, either on the question of match fixing or on the involvement of our players in betting. But there is no question that a large amount of betting takes place on cricket matches.

21. This then is the state of "evidence" before me. Taking all relevant circumstances and the broad probabilities of the case into account, particularly the Indian conditions of which I may be assumed to be intimately aware. I accept without hesitation the statements of Sachin Tendulkar, Mohammad Azharuddin, Nayan Mongia , Ajay jadeja, Sunil Gavaskar, Kapil Dev , Ajit Wadekar ,Dilip Vengsarkar, Sanjay Manjrekar, Chandu Borde ,Sandeep Patil, D.V.Subba Rao, Dr.Ali Irani , Mukarand Waigankar, Balasaheb J. Pandit , R Mohan ,S.K. Shyam and Pradeep Vijaykar.

22. So far as the other persons whose statements were recorded by me are concerned, who are mostly journalists even they have not been able to identify any particular player or players in the Indian team as being parties to match fixing or who bet on cricket .These journalists ,undoubtedly respectable and unmotivated , have drawn their own inferences on the general situation which now obtains the game of cricket. All of these inferences are not unjustified because I am also inclined to believe that a large amount of betting takes place on cricket in India. That is what the Howrah superintendent of police Mr Purokayastha told me and, more specifically than that , that is what one of the top officials of Bombay police told me over the phone. But even they said that it has not been possible for their investigating teams to identify any player or players in the Indian team who lay bets on cricket.

23. In so far as the involvement of the journalists in betting or match fixing is concerned, there is equally no credible evidence to justify their implication. Fortunately, mobile phones are banned but the press box is fitted with sophisticated gadgets of communication which are capable of being misused. Some journalists have themselves spoken before me of such misuse. One of them has suggested that the entry to the Press Box should be screened properly, a suggestion which I endorse. That may atleast help remove a plausible cause of suspicion in the minds of the general public that there is something rotten in the kingdom of cricket.

24. Accordingly, my answer to question (b), (c) and (e) is that the data before me does not show that any Indian player, official or journalist has ever taken part in match fixing or that any of them lays bets on cricket for the purpose of match fixing so as to lose a match. There is, undoubtedly, large scale betting on cricket but that is law and order problem. Betting, like drinking is a common human weakness since the beginning of the world. One cannot, therefore, rule out the possibility that some Indian players may be laying the flutter of a bet. But, it is less than just to conclude that lay bets for losing a match. Such a charge lacks substance and is unjustified.

25. What remains for consideration is question (d). The question is whether Shri Ajit Wadekar put tap on telephones of Indian cricketers after their return from the South African tour and ,if so, whether such tapping is permissible in law.

26 The answer to the last part of the question is self evident. Tapping of phones by a private individual, be he the manager of the cricket team is illegal. On the question whether Ajit Wadekar tapped the phones, I am inclined to accept the explanation given by him before me, which he seems to have given the Press also. The original fax dictated by him contained the word "tap". Ajit has said in his statement before me that he did not tap the telephone of any player. I consider it hardly likely that a man of such wide and large experience like Ajit Wadekar will indulge in the gimmick of tapping the phones of the players. I answer this question accordingly.

27. Before concluding I must express my thankfulness to the officers and staff of the BCCI who extended the necessary facilties and courtesies to me. But more than that I will be failing in my duty if I did not record my deep appreciation of the cooperation extended to me by the players, the managers and journalists alike. Not one of them who was invited to speak declined to come. Not only that, every one of them showed quite an amount of enthusiasm for making the best use of the oppurtunity afforded to them. It was transparent that they were all actuated by one common objective, namely to save the fair name of the game called cricket. There were just a few specks of dust here and there as they rise from a worn wicket but there was no mud slinging by any one at all. They told me the truth as they honestly perceived it. That is why I must express my special sense of thankfulness to them. It would have been well nigh impossible for me to complete my task without the cooperation of all these gentlemen. I am sure that with all the good intentions of so many well-informed persons, the game of cricket will survive in India and the rumors of match fixing will die a natural death. It wil be a sad day if the common men and women, on whose support the game has occupied a pride of place, will stay away, believing that the bookies, not the chosen eleven, play the game.

Y.V. CHANDRACHUD

Dated: 17th November, 1997.