A report in the Times of India states that a police officer reported to the Mudgal committee that a bookmaker named M S Dhoni in relation to fixing a game between the Chennai Super Kings and the Rajasthan Royals. The exiled former cricket administrator Lalit Modi shared what he calls the “full report of IPS Officer Sampath” on twitter.
There is often a lot of hearsay in these matters. In this instance, it is useful (if the document is genuine and indeed complete as Mr. Modi says) to have a primary source – a police officer’s testimony. I read the document. At one point, the following is stated:
It was stated that Vikram Agarwal told him that there was negotiation for. match fixing between Rajasthan Royals and Chennai Super Kings,and Meiyappan has to communicate to Ghennai Super ·Kings Captain M.S. Dhoni and few others for finalization: Later Kitty came to know that they were planning to fix the match between Rajasthan Royals and Chennai Super Kings scheduled on 12.05.2013. Again on 27.04.2013 also after the dinner party, negotiation was on and Vikram Agarwal informed to Kitty some deal was worked out. Later after dinner party Meiyappan has informed that Chennai Super Kings M.S. Dhoni has agreed to play as per plan and his team will score 140 runs – and this was communicated to somebody (Sanjay) in Jaipur over phone by Vikram Agarwal when Kitty was nearby.
It should be kept in mind that this is one police officer’s written testimony. Other testimony is obviously not available in the public domain. The full picture of actual events may well be at odds with what this police officer says. But it is significant that (a) a police officer has reported all this in writing to a fact finding committee appointed by the Supreme Court of India. (b) it is as dark and disturbing as it is, and (c) it suggests that Meiyappan’s role went beyond betting and providing information.
At least as far as I can tell, this is the first time that a document such as this has become available in the public domain. I am fairly certain that professional journalists see documents such as this one all the time. As any researcher will tell you, primary sources are revealing in ways that are often hard to fathom at first reading. This makes this document significant.
I’d read this skeptically. But as a cricket fan, I am also inclined to take this seriously given that there must be some legal jeopardy associated with making stuff up in writing to an inquiry committee constituted on the recommendation of a law court.
These are grim times for cricket in India.