NEWS
SCHEDULES
COLUMNS
PREVIOUS TOURS
OTHER SPORTS
STATISTICS
INTERVIEWS
SLIDE SHOW
ARCHIVES

No notice yet, says Prabhakar's advocate

Onkar Singh, in Delhi

Manoj Prabhakar's advocate Nidesh Gupta says he will respond appropriately to the notice sent by V N Kaura, advocate for Kapil Dev, only after his office receives it.

"We have not yet got any letter from Mr Kaura's office and, hence, till such a time that I actually receive the notice, my response would be only hypothetical. We would respond only after we study the contents of the letter," Gupta told rediff.com in an informal chat this morning.

Gupta refused to answer any query regarding the video recording of conversations of some top cricket players and administrators.

"We have seven days to respond to the notice and I intend to make use of that time made available to us," said Gupta.

He confirmed that the controversial tapes have not been handed over to the CBI as yet, but said they would be in due course.

"The device with which we video-taped the conversations of various players and administrators is highly sophisticated equipment and is in safe custody," he declared.

Gupta was pleased with the kind of evidence Prabhakar had been able to collect through the video tape.

"The evidence that we have in our possession would force some of the players and administrators to tell the truth before the CBI as well as the court," he claimed.

He refuted the allegation that the video tapes may not be admissible as evidence in a court of law.

In the sixties the Supreme Court of India had quoted an English judgement and held that tape recorded evidence is admissible provided some safe guards are followed. Technology over the years has advanced and it is now possible even to video-tape evidence. The English judgement on which the apex court relied had said that it did appear to the court that "the advantages to be gained by new techniques and new devices" should now be available to the law.

"Provided the accuracy of the recording can be proved and the voice recorded properly identified. In the present case there is not just an audio recording but in fact it is an audio-visual recording which is far more credible than only an audio recording. What makes the evidence more authentic is the fact that recording was done within the four walls of the residence of the person in question who was being interviewed," said Gupta.

He refused to say whether in doing so his client had committed a breach of trust of the concerned person.

Gupta also refused to answer any question about the latest article in Outlook magazine, which points a finger at his client as well as a match-fixer.

"I have not seen the story," said Gupta.

Noted lawyer P N Lekhi, however, rubbished the claim of Gupta. "At best this is some sort of tamasha that gave the media something spicy to write about. When we say is it admissible as evidence, the first question that we ask is: 'Evidence of what'?

"At best, this is an evidence of moral depravity of all concerned parties. But it is not an evidence of any legal violation of any kind. The common man feels cheated because the kind of conduct he had expected from the players was missing. They did not play the game by the rule but by any other consideration," said Lekhi.

He termed Prabhakar's entire effort of gathering evidence to support his allegations as wholly unethical and ungentlemanly.

"It is something that some one intrudes into the privacy of someone and then exposes it. If there was some reference to violation of the foreign exchange act, FERA, or any other serious breach of law, then the whole exercise would have been worth the effort. As far as law is concerned, the whole thing is irrelevant. It is trying to wash a dirty linen in public, which can never be clean," claimed Lekhi.

The Betting Scandal: The full story