Mehta's casting vote on Jadhav raises eyebrows

MUMBAI: The racing fraternity seems to be in absolute shock over Board of Appeal (BOA) chairman Ashwin Mehta's casting vote against the mercy petition filed by trainer Mansingh Jadhav.
Mehta's casting vote led to the rejection of Jadhav's petition after a six-member appeal body voted 3-3 on the issue. Jadhav had filed a mercy petition as per the rules at Royal Western Turf Club RWITC) whereby a professional is eligible to apply for mercy after having served half his punishment.The RWITC stewards had suspended Jadhav for 90 days from November 19, 2015 to February 16, 2016 on two counts without specifying the periods for each punishment.
Jadhav was suspended for 30 and 60 days respectively after the presence of a painkiller and a banned drug substance O-Desmethylvenlafaxine (ODMV) was detected in the urine sample of his trainees. Earlier, Jadhav chose to appeal against the 60-day suspension, which the BOA had rejected confirming his 90day suspension from December 2, 2015 to February 29, 2016.
Later, on completion of more than 50 % of his suspension, Jadhav filed a mercy petition last month. During the hearing last Thursday, the BOA was divided with three members including Mehta declaring that Jadhav had already served 60 days suspension for ODMV and he should seek relief in the 30-day sentence from the stewards.
Since the stewards had awarded a combined suspension period of 90 days to Jadhav which was even upheld by BOA later, the three members in favour of granting mercy argued that since no specific period was stipulated for the two suspensions either by the stewards or BOA, it should not be assumed that Jadhav had served his 60-day suspension. Hence, they felt that his mercy petition should be allowed.
Since the BOA members' verdict resulted in a tie, it boiled down to the casting vote of chairman Mehta, who held on firmly to his assumption that Jadhav had served his punishment of 60 days and the BOA cannot grant him relief as he hadn't challenged the 30-day suspension.
When TOI queried Mehta about this, he held on to his assumptions. However, when he was asked to explain his stand as there were no specific dates that were marked for each suspension, he did not respond despite a reminder.
"It's disturbing," said a trainer on condition of anonymity. "The BOA ruling was entirely based on assumption. To reject a 70-year-old trainer's mercy petition whose four-decade old clean record was acknowledged by the stewards is shocking," he added. One expert wondered, "Was Jadhav convicted of murder or any other heinous crime which marks him out to be a threat to the society if his mercy petition is allowed?" "It's wrong on the part of Mehta to consider assumed technicality and reject the appeal, that too when his board was split on the issue. It is against the spirit of a sporting institution that promotes horse-racing.," he added.