I think the title of this thread is misleading and inaccurate. Akram wasn't caught tampering with the ball instead he is accused of tampering with the ball. The case is still to go to a disciplinary committee which will decide his fate.
Also, I find it a little absurd that the umpires found some "marks on the ball" and immediately thought that some bowler had tampered with it. From what I read in the article, none of the umpires saw Akram actually tamper the ball, they saw the condition of the ball and decided that it had been tampered with. I think Akram could and should make a strong countercase citing the "abrasive nature of the pitch" as has been already mentioned by the Sussex management.