Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
SPORTS LAW
AGAINST
ON BEHALF OF
ORS
&
&
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF
ORS
CRICKET
- APPLICANT-
-RESPONDENT-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SR NO
TITLE
PG NO
List of Abbreviations
Index of Authorities
Statement of Jurisdiction
Statement of Facts
Summary of Arguments
Contention I
10
Contention II
13
Contention III
15
10
Contention IV
17
11
Prayers
22
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
GPL
B.C.CGo
KR
Kodra Ranges
MK
Mandeva Kites
IFC
CAS
CAT
Category
ACUT
ED
PMLA
PIL
CAI
COM
Committee
BOD
Board of Directors
H.C.
High Court
S.C.
Supreme Court
SE Shareholders
Para
Pg
Sec
Section
IPC
SCR
SCC
AIR
IPL
ICC
B.C.C.I
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Cases:
Nizam & Anr. v..State of Rajasthan,2015 (Criminal Appeal 417 OF 2007) Supreme Court
Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam and Anr v State Of Andhra Pradesh, 1993 SCR(2)666, 1993
SCC(2)684
Kunal Majumdar Vs State of Rajasthan,2012 (Criminal Appeal 407 of 2008) - Supreme Court
V.D. Jhingan v. State of U.P., AIR 1966 SC 1762
V.C. Shukla vs. State,1980 AIR 962,1980 SCR(2)380
Ujjagar Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Appeal(crl.) 1044 of 2006)
Dr. KR Lakshmanan V. State of Tamil Nadu (1996) 2 SCC 226
R.K. Dalmia v. Delhi Administration [1962] AIR 1821, 1963 SCR (1) 253
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The applicants/appellants have filed the present Petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Godam for
invoking its ordinary appellate jurisdiction under Section 380 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
which is reproduced herein below:
380- Special right of appeal in certain cases- Notwithstanding anything contained in this chapter, when
more persons than one are convicted in one trial, and an appealable judgment or order has been passed in
respect of any of such persons convicted at such trial shall have a right to appeal.
The defense/respondents agree that the petition is maintainable in the fact and circumstances of the case
at hand.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
B.C.CGo is the parent body responsible for all the activIties related to cricket in Godam subcontinent,
GPL is its brain child to showcase the shortest version of the game of cricket in its 20-20 format. GPL
was launched in the year 2009 and it has been a hit ever since its inception. GPL did face some
turbulence in the 5th edition when a club named as Kondra Ranges (KR) was found guilty of match
fixing and spot fixing. Kondra Ranges was owned by a media tycoon Takishi. Every time any allegation
popped up, it was always subdued by sufficient explanations from Takishi and clean chit was given to KR
by B.C.CGo
Xerxese Morennio, was the Commissioner of GPL, also business development manager of B.C.CGo. He
was a potent business entity who motivated many business federations to invest into the game of cricket.
When the competition was into its 5th edition, general elections of BCCGo were supposed to be held.
This time Chairman of B.C.CGo for five years, Niladris was dethroned and Don Makofusa came to
power. This was the time when allegations against KR were taken seriously and thus could not take part
in the 6th edition of GPL, as it was banned by IFC for violation of IFCs Anti-Corruption Code protocols
and a penalty of Rs 60 crore as a fine was imposed on it. KR also had an option to go into appeal to the
CAS within 21 days from the order , in spite of it, it chose to serve the punishment and subsequently
paid the sum of Rs 60 crore within a month. Takishi was also banned by IFC to take part into any
activity related to GPL, though his company (Pace airways) continued to remain the official partner of the
competition and official sponsor of the national team.
For the 6th edition, a new team named as Mandeva Kites (MK) entered the competition. The team
involved 8 players who were ex-players of KR including the captain of KR who was purchased for a
record price. The majority shares were held by Tutis Olanga who was the step son of the IFC Chief Putul
Tutis Olanga. It was pertinent to note that the major share owners of K.R. were the sweat equity
shareholders of the new Mandeva Kites (Zia Kuriet, Kaifi Shaikh, and Gogo Morrenio) .MK in the 6th
edition lost many matches due to low runs and fall of wickets involving mostly run outs. Thus due to this
questions related to transfer of liability arouse as it was alleged that MK was a result of manipulation of
the existing system.
Xerxese appointed Peter Woodford to coach KR for the 5th edition of GPL. His appointment was highly
criticized as he had faced many discipline and corruption charges in his illustrious carreer .After KR was
banned a shocking incident took place where Peter Woodford was found dead in his hotel room. Before
his death he made several calls, out of which some were made to his relative including calls made to Zia
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
1. The accused should be held liable for the murder of Peter Woodford as there are sufficient
grounds to establish this charge.
The direction of the investigation was at fault from the very start and was under the influence of the big
and mighty. Further the motive behind the murder can be established and the circumstantial evidence in
the present case is enough to solely incriminate the accused.
2. There have been serious defaults on part of the accused for them to be held liable for corruption
In Corruption, the allegations made against Xerxese and the three SE shareholders are true, Xexeses
silence showed hiatus in the investigation process and the important documents which were missing, was
nobodys fault but BCCGo.
3. The transfer of liability allegations made on the applicant are true.
In transfer of liability all the allegations made on the three sweat equity share holders and the
management of MK are true because the decision of issuing of sweat equity shares are in the hands of
directors and owners and there was substantial malicious intention of the sweat equity share owners to be
a part of the betting racket .
4. The players Hank and Liam are Guilty of the offense of spot fixing.
The team MK is found to have relations with betting syndicate. Evidence obtained against the two players
is admissible in the court of law. The players were found to commit the said offense in furtherance of
common intention. It is found that the players have deceived the officials into entering into a contract
with them and also have misappropriated the property entrusted with them.
CONTENTION I
1.1 The direction of the investigation from the very start was at fault.
The findings of the investigation team were not only conjectural but also perverse as the circumstantial
evidence was not given much importance and the case was decided purely on the basis of direct evidence
which was missing. The investigation started off on the wrong foot, it started on the presumption that
there was no murder. Thus only direct evidence was considered and important links and circumstantial
evidence which could have negated the presumption were not given much importance. Admittedly, since
there was no eye-witness in the case, it sought to be established by the prosecution on the basis of
circumstantial evidence.
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the settled law is that the circumstance from which the
conclusion
of guilt is drawn should be fully proved and these circumstances must be conclusive in
nature1.In the present scenario as well the articles recovered and the circumstances unravel the ongoing
racket of betting syndicates, which has direct links to the allegations made by Hank and Liam. It is an
irrefutable fact that the reason for which KR was banned was none but corruption, for which it had to pay
a mammoth amount as fine.
The conduct of KR from that very point was very doubtful and debatable as their decision to decline an
appeal to CAS and pay a mammoth amount as fine without any hesitation or negotiations in itself raises a
question to be answered by them. This conduct when linked to the circumstances of the case and
considering the fact that Woodford being the coach of KR, was an important lead to unravel or unriddle
this spot fixing racket which had its roots in KR. Thus this was a planned strategy to escape from getting
exposed as it was highly probable that approaching CAS for an appeal could have unveiled their secrets
and would have broken this nexus. Thus as a part of this strategy a new entity MK was created in order to
1
10
2
3
4
5
Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam and Anr vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, 1993 SCR(2)666, 1993 SCC(2)684
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Kunal Majumdar Vs State of Rajasthan,2012 (Criminal Appeal 407 of 2008)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
11
12
CONTENTION II
2.1 The allegations made on Xerxese and the three SE shareholders are true.
The sting operation revealed the racket of spot fixing which in turn led to the disclosure of a long nexus
functioning behind this. Once this racket was exposed, many new names came out and it was found that it
is not only Hank and Liam who are a part of this, but there is a long chain of people involved in this
misendeavour. Everyone including the players, management of MK, Xerxese and the BCCGo were found
to be part of this nexus. After the revelation, everyone tried to put the blame on one another, and in order
to protect themselves, started playing safe. The franchise of MK very easily submitted the resignation of
the two players in order to portray that they are in no manner a part of this wrongdoing and showcased
the whole thing as a way of their protest against corruption for the mere reason of concealing their role in
the misendeavour. BCCGo also had links in this racket and it had no defence in its favour, thus it gave
vague and self-proclaimed assumptions. They have been found guilty under article 23 of PMLA, 200210
which states that- Where money-laundering involves two or more inter-connected transactions and one or
more such transactions is or are proved to be involved in money-laundering, then for the purposes of
adjudication or confiscation under section 811, it shall, unless otherwise proved to the satisfaction of the
Adjudicating Authority, be presumed that the remaining transactions form part of such inter-connected
transactions. And in the present case such inter-connected transactions have taken place.
Thus from their conduct it can be inferred that everyone was trying to be on the safer side and looking for
an escape route to avoid coming under the scanner of investigation.
13
12
13
14
15
14
CONTENTION III
16 To be read in conjunction with Rule 8 of the Companies (Share Capital and Debentures) Rules, 2014 as framed under
Chapter IV of the Companies Act, 2013 for private limited companies and the Securities and Exchanges Board of India (Issue
of Sweat Equity) Regulations, 2002 for public listed companies.
15
17 Delhi Administration V Gurdip Singh Uban & Ors, 2000 Supp (2) SCR 496
18 Nazir Ahmad v King Emperor, AIR 1936 PC 253.
19 Ramchandra Keshav Adke v Govind Joti Chavre (1975) 1 SCC 559.
20 Shiv Bahadur Singh V. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1954 SC 322.
21 Deep Chand V. State of Rajasthan AIR 1961 SC 1527.
22 Black's Law Dictionary 1042 (9th Edn.2009)
16
CONTENTION IV
Whether Hank and Liam are guilty of the offense of spot fixing and whether Xerxese,
BCCGo, and MK are a part of the nexus of betting syndicate
17
18
25 ibid
26 962 AIR 1821, 1963 SCR (1) 253
27 Common cause V. Union of India (1999) 6 SCC 667
19
(iii) instances where players passed on information to a betting syndicate about team
composition, probable result, pitch condition, weather, etc.,
It has been fairly established in the previous contentions that the team MK had relations with a betting
syndicate since one of the sweat equity share owners was the owner of a betting portal. This makes it
reasonable to believe that the inside information such as mentioned above, would be passed on for the
purpose of betting.
4.6 Players are liable under rules and regulations apart from Indian municipal legislations29
In the alternate, it is humbly submitted by the respondent, that in addition to these Indian legislations, the
accused are liable under a number of rules and regulations laid down by the organizations such as BCCI,
ICC, as well as guidelines provided by the operational rules of IPL.
The players are found involved in the offenses like spot fixing, and violating the anti corruption
code laid down by BCCI as well as ICC. We contend that they are guilty under the offense of
corruption which comes under the ambit of article 2.1 of the Anti-Corruption Code of Conduct of
ICC30.
The players Liam and Hank were found to have relations with a betting syndicate. This is
violative of Indian laws on gambling, and this also violates the article 2.2 of the anti-corruption
code of ICC31 which deals with betting.
Paragraph 10 of the factsheet talks about the ambiguity and inconsistencies in the performance of
28
29
30
31
20
32 ibid
33 IPL Code of conduct for players and team officials
21
PRAYERS
In light of facts of the case, the arguments advanced and the authorities cited, this Honble Court
may be pleased to allow this appeal and adjudge and declare as follows:
In the matter of Xerxese Morennio, B.C.C.Go, and ors V Central Agency of Investigation:
1. To Quash the appeals filed by the Appplicants and uphold and maintain the status quo of the order
passed by CAI court and uphold the charges framed against them.
2. Pass any other order, which the court may deem fit in light of justice, equity and good conscience.
In the matter of Liam Jackson, Hank Jefferson, and ors V Internatonal Federation of Cricket:
1. Quash the appeals filed by the Applicants in the Honble Court, and uphold the decision given by
CAI court as valid and justified.
2. Pass any other order, which the court may deem fit in light of justice, equity and good conscience.
And for this act of kindness, the Respondents shall duty bound forever pray.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sd/(Counsel for the Respondents)
22