Jaipur IPL Cricket Private Ltd, owners of Rajasthan Royals has made it clear to the Supreme Court that Raj Kundra, an investor in the company and who has been indicted by the >Justice Mudgal panel was not part of the management either directly or indirectly and had not participated in the decision making process.
In its response to the panel’s findings, it said Mr. Raj Kundra was not one of the initial promoters when the franchise was born in 2008. He became an investor in 2009 and held 11 per cent stake in the controlling entity. He did not hold any shares in his personal capacity as it was held through his family concerns. Mr. Raj Kundra had never participated in bidding of players or strategy adopted by the franchise for the games or any other decision in relation to day-to-day functioning.
It said neither the company nor any of its representatives was called by the probe panel as only Mr. Raj Kundra was invited for the probe in his personal capacity. Rajasthan Royals said “it is fully supportive of the efforts of the probe panel and the apex court to cleanse cricket of the allegations/ issues of betting and spot fixing. It has always taken all necessary and reasonable measures and safeguards to ensure due compliance of the relevant rules and regulations of the BCCI. Rajasthan Royals is to be heard in the event of any proceeding initiated or contemplated against it.”
In his response Mr. Raj Kundra said he was a respectable member of the society who had all along co-operated with all the respective committees. He was prepared to transfer his shares till he was given a clean chit and to receive the shares back only if he was cleared of the charges.
He said the findings of the Mudgal panel against him had caused severe damage to his reputation in society and casts aspersions on his integrity. Such aspersions had serious consequences of his association with Rajasthan Royals, he said and sought a copy of the materials collected by the panel. In the absence of any materials and discussions/analysis he was unable to effectively defend himself by pointing out the errors in the materials collected by the investigating team and the analysis thereof by the panel, he said.