Full Judgment Text
$~46
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 22.05.2026
+ LPA 399/2026
VINESH PHOGAT .....Appellant
Through: Mr. Raj Shekhar Rao, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Ritwik Prakash,
Ms. Vishakha Gupta, Ms. Aashita
Khanna and Mr. Neil M. Goswami,
Advocates.
Versus
WRESTLING FEDERATION OF INDIA & ORS......Respondents
Through: Mr. Hemant Phalpher and Mr.
Karishmit Keswani, Advocates for
R1.
Mr. Udit Dedhiya, SPC with Ms.
Apurva Sachdev and Mr. Preyansh
Gupta, Advocates for R2/UoI.
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA
TEJAS KARIA, J. ( Oral )
CM. APPL. 35344/2026
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Application stands disposed of.
LPA 399/2026, CM Nos.35343/2026 & 35345/2026
3. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the Appellant
assailing the order dated 18.05.2026 (“ Impugned Order ”) passed by the
learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) 6766/2026 titled ‘ Vinesh Phogat v.
Wrestling Federation of India’ (“ Writ Petition ”). The Writ Petition seeks to
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 1 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
challenge Respondent No. 1’s Asian Games Selection Policy dated
25.02.2026 (“ Policy ”) and the Selection Criteria Circular dated 06.05.2026
(“ Circular ”) to the extent that they operate to exclude the Appellant from
participation in the selection trials of Asian Games 2026 scheduled to be
held on 30.05.2025 and 31.05.2026 (“ Selection Trials ”).
4. The Writ Petition also seeks quashing of the Show Cause Notice
bearing reference WFI/DC/SCN/2026 dated 09.05.2026 (“ SCN ”), with a
further prayer seeking a direction to Respondent No. 1 to carry out the
Selection Trials under the supervision and observation of representatives /
observers nominated by the Indian Olympic Association (“ IOA ”) and
Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (“ MYAS ”) so as to ensure fairness in
the selection process.
5. Vide the Impugned Order, the learned Single Judge issued notice in
the Writ Petition and CM APPL. 33268/2026 for stay and granted liberty to
the Appellant to file a comprehensive reply to the SCN and directed
Respondent No. 1 to carry the SCN to its logical conclusion before the next
date of hearing of the Writ Petition i.e. 06.07.2026.
6. The Appellant is aggrieved by the Impugned Order to the extent that it
did not grant any interim protection during the pendency of the Writ Petition
despite the imminent Selection Trials scheduled for 30.05.2026 and
31.05.2026.
7. The Appellant is an internationally acclaimed wrestler, who has
represented India at the highest level of international wrestling, including at
the Olympic Games, the World Championships, the Asian Games and the
Commonwealth Games. The Appellant has secured several medals and
distinctions for India in international competitions, inter alia , including
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 2 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
bronze medals at the 2019 and 2022 World Wrestling Championships, gold
medals at the 2014, 2018 and 2022 Commonwealth Games, and a gold
medal and a bronze medal at the 2018 and 2014 Asian Games, respectively.
8. Respondent No. 1, the Wrestling Federation of India, is the
recognised National Sports Federation governing the sport of wrestling in
India under the aegis of MYAS, Government of India, and is affiliated with
United World Wrestling (“ UWW ”), the international governing body for the
sport. Respondent No. 1 is, inter alia , responsible for the administration,
regulation, promotion and conduct of wrestling activities in India, including
the organisation of National Championships and selection trials, as well as
the selection of wrestlers to represent India in various international
competitions, including the Asian Games, the Olympic Games and the
World Championships.
9. Respondent No. 2, the Union of India, through MYAS, exercises
regulatory and administrative control over recognised National Sports
Federations, including Respondent No. 1.
10. Respondent No. 3, the IOA, is the apex body responsible for the
development, promotion and representation of Olympic sports in India and is
recognised by the International Olympic Committee. It is responsible for the
coordination and participation of Indian athletes in multi-sport international
events, including the Olympic Games, Asian Games and Commonwealth Games.
11. The brief facts leading to the present Appeal are as under:
11.1. On 06.12.2024, the International Testing Agency (“ ITA ”)
informed the Appellant that she had been included in the UWW
Registered Testing Pool. Thereafter, on 14.12.2024 and
15.12.2024, the Appellant formally intimated the ITA that she
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 3 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
would remain on sabbatical until August 2025 on account of
the fact that she was in her family way. The Appellant further
informed the ITA that, in accordance with the prescribed
procedure, she would furnish written notice six months prior to
her return to competition and would ensure compliance with all
applicable obligations, including whereabouts filings and
testing protocols.
11.2. On 17.12.2024, the ITA sought clarification regarding the
Appellant’s temporary retirement status until August 2025. In
response thereto, on 18.12.2024, the Appellant clarified that she
would be undertaking a temporary sabbatical until August
2025. The Appellant further stated that her retirement from the
sport of wrestling was not permanent in nature and that she
intended to resume competitive wrestling upon the conclusion
of the said sabbatical.
11.3. Thereafter, on 30.06.2025 the Appellant informed the ITA and
UWW that her sabbatical had concluded and that she intended
to resume training with effect from 15.07.2025. On the same
date, the ITA acknowledged the Appellant’s return to active
training and competition and, by e-mail dated 03.07.2025,
expressly stated that the Appellant would be eligible to compete
from 01.01.2026 onwards.
11.4. In July 2025, the Appellant gave birth to her first child.
Thereafter, on 12.12.2025, the Appellant informed the Director
General of the Sports Authority of India (“ SAI ”), UWW and
the TOPS Programme that, following the birth of her child, she
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 4 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
had resumed wrestling training and looked forward to their
support and cooperation in the lead-up to future international
competitions, including the 2028 Olympic Games.
11.5. The Asian Games Selection Policy dated 25.02.2026 published
by Respondent No. 1 restricted eligibility of the Asian Games
trials to the following wrestlers:
i. All medal winners of the 2025 Senior National Wrestling
Championship.
ii. All medal winners of the 2026 Federation Cup (Senior)
Free Style, Greco Roam Style & Women Wrestling.
iii. All medal winners of the 2026 Under-20 National
Wrestling Championship.
iv. All medal winners of the 2026 Under-23 National
Wrestling Championship (if held before the trial).
11.6. Thereafter, the Asian Games Selection Circular dated
06.05.2026 issued by Respondent No. 1 provided that only the
following wrestlers shall be eligible to participate in the
selection trials:
i. All medal winners of 2025 Senior National Wrestling
th
Championship held at Ahmedabad (Gujarat) from 12 to
th
14 December 2025.
ii. All medal winners of 2026 Senior Federation Cup held at
th th
Ghaziabad (UP) from 12 to 14 February 2026.
iii. All medal winners of the Under-20 National Wrestling
th
Championship held in Bhilai (Chhattisgarh) from 10 to
th
12 April 2026.
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 5 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
11.7. Subsequently, Respondent No. 1 issued Show Cause Notice
dated 09.05.2026 to the Appellant, inter alia , seeking an
explanation in relation to the Paris Olympic weigh-in issue,
which has been adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration of
Sports. Pursuant thereto, Respondent No. 1 has rendered the
Appellant ineligible from participating in any WFI
competitions and events till 26.06.2026, including the Senior
Open Ranking Tournament at Gonda.
11.8. The Appellant claims that the Asian Games Selection Policy
and Circular are exclusionary in nature, and that it is unfairly
discriminatory towards the Appellant. Further, it is contended
by the Appellant that the Show Cause Notice issued by
Respondent No. 1 arbitrarily renders the Appellant ineligible
from competing in WFI competitions.
11.9. Aggrieved by the same, the Appellant preferred the Writ
Petition before this Court. By way of the Impugned Order, the
learned Single Judge issued notice in the Writ Petition,
however, no interim protection was granted to the Appellant
and listed the matter for 06.07.2026. Aggrieved by the
Impugned Order, the present Appeal has been filed by the
Appellant.
12. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant
submitted that the Appellant is one of India’s most accomplished
international wrestlers and an Olympian, having represented India at the
highest level of competition, including the Olympic Games, the World
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 6 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
Championships, the Asian Games and the Commonwealth Games. It was
further submitted that the Policy and the Circular issued by Respondent No.
1 create a rigid and mechanically exclusionary eligibility framework
governing participation in the Selection Trials. The Appellant has
challenged the legality, validity and constitutional propriety of the Policy
and the Circular in the Writ Petition, inasmuch as the impugned framework
restricts eligibility solely to medal winners of specified domestic events in
previous years.
13. It was further submitted on behalf of the Appellant that she is not
seeking automatic qualification or any relaxation of sporting standards, but
merely an opportunity to participate in the Selection Trials and compete on
merit. In this regard, it was submitted that the Appellant had duly complied
with the applicable anti-doping and return-to-competition framework
administered by the ITA on behalf of UWW, which was expressly
confirmed vide communication dated 03.07.2025 stating that the Appellant
would be eligible to resume competitive participation with effect from
01.01.2026.
14. It was contended on behalf of the Appellant that owing to the
Appellant’s duly disclosed maternity-related absence, childbirth, post-
partum recovery and regulated return-to-competition process, none of the
qualification routes prescribed under the Policy and Circular were
realistically available to her. Consequently, the impugned framework was
stated to convert her maternity-related sporting interruption into a disabling
factor operating against participation itself, thereby producing manifestly
unequal and discriminatory consequences for a woman athlete.
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 7 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
15. Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant further submitted that the
legality and bona fide of the SCN has also been challenged in the Writ
Petition as the same was issued immediately prior to the Senior Open
Ranking Tournament at Gonda, Uttar Pradesh, whereby the Appellant was
purportedly rendered ineligible from participation in WFI events till
26.06.2026, effectively extending beyond both the Gonda Tournament and
the Selection Trials. Although the Appellant was permitted to register for the
Gonda event and was physically present at the venue, the Appellant was
prevented from participating in the tournament.
16. It was further submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant
that the Appellant specifically contended before the Ld. Single Judge that
the SCN was ex-facie without jurisdiction, legally untenable and mala fide
in nature as it relied upon outdated, superseded and non-existent regulatory
provisions by seeking to reopen issues already conclusively dealt with
before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“ CAS ”), and formed part of the
larger exclusionary framework operating to prevent the Appellant’s
participation in the Selection Trials.
17. The learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the CAS
in its Award dated 16.08.2024, has in Paragraph 126 observed that the
Appellant entered the field of play and fought and won three rounds and
reached the final of the 50 kgs wrestling competition at the Paris Olympics
Games before she failed the second weigh-in and was ineligible to compete
in the final. The Award further observed that “ there is no suggestion of any
wrongdoing on her part ”.
18. In view of the same, it was submitted on behalf of the Appellant that
the SCN has raised stale allegations and made derogatory statements that the
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 8 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
Appellant brought national embarrassment by damaging the reputation of
Indian Wrestling and the WFI, which were completely unwarranted, pre-
mediated and ex-facie unsustainable.
19. The learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant also relied upon the past
practice of Respondent No. 1, where the wrestlers were permitted to
participate in the trial with special permission by WFI. The learned Senior
Counsel for the Appellant relied upon the Guidelines for the National
Coaching Camp dated 29.04.2025, which provides a discretion to
Respondent No. 1 to give special permission to participate in the trials.
20. The learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant submitted that as per
the Invitation dated 22.12.2023 issued by Respondent No. 1 for participation
in 2023 Senior National Wrestling Championship, it is clearly provided that
the Selection Committee will have the discretion to select the iconic players
like medallist for Olympic World Championship, without trials provided
recommendation by Chief Coach or an expert. It was submitted that given
the Appellant is an iconic player, she is entitled to be permitted to participate
in the Selection Trials irrespective of the Policy, the Circular or the SCN,
which are challenged in the Writ Petition before the learned Single Judge.
21. It was further submitted that the Policy and the Circular do not give
any leeway for the selection of the iconic players like the Appellant in case
of duly informed maternity sabbatical in the previous year, whereby the
Appellant has been disqualified from participating in the Selection Trials on
account of the Policy and the Circular.
22. The Appellant has further relied upon various international sporting
frameworks, including the regulations of the BWF, WTA, ITTF and WKF,
all of which expressly recognise pregnancy, childbirth and maternity-related
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 9 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
absence as circumstances warranting protected ranking, accommodation and
structured return-to competition pathways. The Appellant submitted that the
complete absence of any maternity-sensitive accommodation under the
impugned framework is contrary to the constitutional guarantees of
substantive equality, fairness and non-arbitrariness.
23. It was further submitted on behalf of the Appellant that the Impugned
Order does not grant any interim relief to the Appellant and the next date of
hearing in the Writ Petition is fixed for 06.07.2026, by which time the Writ
Petition itself would be rendered infructuous given that the Selection Trials
would be held on 30.05.2026 and 31.05.2026.
24. It is further contended by the Appellant that by directing the matter to
be listed on 06.07.2026 without safeguarding the Appellant’s right to
participate in the Selection Trials pending adjudication of the Writ Petition,
the Impugned Order has caused grave prejudice to the Appellant as it has
resulted in the irreversible loss of the Appellant’s opportunity to participate
in the Selection Trials for representing India at the Asian Games 2026.
25. Per contra , learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1
submitted that the Appellant is not entitled to participate in the selection
trials, since she had voluntarily retired from the sport of wrestling and, on
that account, did not participate in the competitions specified in the Circular
issued by Respondent No. 1. It was further submitted that Respondent No. 1
has no power to create exemption to the Policy or the Circular.
26. The learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 submitted that the Policy
and the Circular are uniformly applied to all the athletes and, therefore, there
is no discrimination to the Appellant. It was further submitted that in
absence of any discretion provided in the Policy or the Circular, Respondent
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 10 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
No. 1 has no ability to permit the Appellant to participate in the Selection
Trials.
27. The learned SPC appearing for Respondent No. 2 submitted that
MYAS has imposed no bar upon the Appellant’s participation in the
Selection Trials, however MYAS cannot step into the shoes of Respondent
No. 1, as such intervention may entail international sporting repercussions.
28. The learned SPC for Respondent No. 2 further submitted that
Respondent No. 2 would arrange independent observers for the Selection
Trials from SAI and IOA to maintain transparency and fairness and also get
the entire Section Trial video-recorded, subject to directions from this Court.
29. Having heard the learned Counsel for the Parties, we are of the view
that although the Impugned Order is in the nature of an interim order, in the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, this Appeal requires
consideration.
30. The only issue that requires to be considered is whether during the
pendency of the Writ Petition, the Appellant should be allowed to participate
in the Selection Trials to be held on 30.05.2026 and 31.06.2026 given that
the next date of hearing in Writ Petition is on 06.07.2026.
31. At the outset, we would like to observe that motherhood in India and
across the world is celebrated. Becoming mother is a great virtue and the
laws and society always have given respect to mothers. Becoming a mother
is both an intimate transformation and a social moment. Across cultures and
histories, motherhood has been celebrated and supported in widely different
ways. At the same time, becoming mother can never become a disability.
The Appellant being an internationally acclaimed athlete, has brought
several laurels to the country. It is acknowledged that the motherhood
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 11 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
cannot be treated as a professional impediment or a circumstance warranting
adverse treatment. A legal and regulatory framework that either expressly or
impliedly disadvantages a woman on account of pregnancy or post-partum
recovery would clearly violate the principles of non-discrimination
enshrined in Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950.
32. It cannot be denied that the journey of a female athlete through
pregnancy and the post-partum period is one that is marked by extraordinary
physical challenges, the magnitude of which is often insufficiently
acknowledged within institutional sporting frameworks. We cannot remain
oblivious to the physiological realities and disadvantages related to child
birth that female athletes undergo during maternity.
33. The motherhood must be viewed as a natural and deeply significant
aspect of life that deserves accommodation and institutional sensitivity.
Therefore, the law must ensure that motherhood does not become a ground
for exclusion or marginalisation of female athletes such as the Appellant. In
the present case, the Appellant’s exclusion from the Selection Trials is
directly attributable to the sabbatical and temporary retirement from her
sporting activities. The duration of her maternity and recovery from the
same coincided with the schedule of the Championships, which were
required to be participated for meeting the eligibility criteria for the
Selection Trials of the Asian Games, 2026 in accordance with the Policy and
the Circular.
34. Further, the observations made by Respondent No. 1 in the SCN with
regard to the mishap in 2024 Paris Olympic Games, which led to
disqualification of the Appellant, by calling it “ national embarrassment ” is
deplorable. Such observations made in the SCN despite the Award issued by
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 12 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
CAS, which clearly held that there was no wrongdoing on part of the
Appellant, appear to be pre-mediated and are ex-facie misconceived and
ought to have been avoided. Such observations are retrograde and show the
mala fide intent of Respondent No. 1 by being vindictive against the
Appellant.
35. While the Policy, the Circular and the SCN are being examined by the
learned Single Judge in the Writ Petition, it is imperative that the Writ
Petition is not made infructuous by not allowing the Appellant to participate
in the Selection Trials during the pendency of the Writ Petition. Prima facie ,
the Appellant has made out a good case on merits to challenge the Policy
and the Circular being completely arbitrary and discriminatory by restricting
the participation of the athletes in the Selection Trials, who are the medal
winners of 2025 and 2026, thereby disqualifying the Appellant from
participation in the Selection Trials.
36. Admittedly, the Appellant had duly applied for sabbatical during 2025
and, therefore, could not participate in any championship or competition
held in that year as the Appellant gave birth to her first child in July, 2025.
The Appellant had kept informed the ITA and UWW as well as SAI about
her sabbatical and also received confirmation on 03.07.2025 that the
Appellant would be eligible to compete from 01.01.2026 onwards.
37. The standard for Selection Trials, as adopted in the Policy and the
Circular, marks significant deviation from the past practice. The Guidelines
for the National Coaching Camps dated 29.04.2025 issued by Respondent
No. 1 clearly provides that the Respondent has discretion to select iconic
players for Asian Games without participating in the coaching to be eligible
for the trials.
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 13 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
38. In view of the above, the Policy and the Circular are clearly
exclusionary in nature as it does not give any discretion to Respondent No. 1
to consider iconic players like the Appellant in view of the sabbatical taken
on account of her maternity leave. It is well recognised principle of law that
due to maternity, a woman cannot be prejudiced in any manner in terms of
her employment, career, ranking and promotion during the period of maternity
leave. Therefore, the Policy and the Circular are required to be examined by
the learned Single Judge on merit in the Writ Petition, which is pending.
39. Further, the grounds taken in the SCN appear to be pre-mediated and
reopening the closed issues. Thus, the learned Single Judge would examine
the same on merit once the SCN is brought to the logical conclusion as
directed vide the Impugned Order.
40. However, in the meanwhile, it is necessary that the Appellant is
permitted to participate in the Selection Trials in the interest of sport and
justice. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is
clear that except for the Appellant’s motherhood and the SCN issued by
Respondent No. 1, she would be entitled to participate in the Selection
Trials. Therefore, the circumstances were beyond her control and while the
legality of the Policy, the Circular and the outcome of the SCN is examined
by the learned Single Judge, it is deemed appropriate to protect the interest
of the Appellant by permitting her to participate in the Selection Trials.
41. In view of the above analysis, the present Appeal is disposed of with
the following directions:
i. The Appellant shall be permitted to participate in the Selection Trials
for Asian Games, 2026, which are scheduled for 30.05.2026 and
31.05.2026.
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 14 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40
ii. The Selection Trials shall be video-recorded by Respondent No. 1.
iii. Respondent No. 2 shall nominate two independent observers from
Sports Authority of India and Indian Olympic Association, who shall
observe the Selection Trials for Asian Games, 2026 and submit a
Report before the learned Single Judge in the pending Writ Petition.
42. We clarify that we have not made any observations on merit and it is
open for the Parties to raise all pleas available to them before the learned
Single Judge in the pending Writ Petition, which shall be decided on its
merit. Since observations made in this Order are confined to the limited
issue, which has been dealt with herein above, the Writ Petition shall be
decided without being influenced by these observations.
43. The present Appeal stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid
directions. Pending Application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
TEJAS KARIA, J
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ
MAY 22, 2026
ap/sms/st
Signature Not Verified
LPA 399/2026 Page 15 of 15
Signed By:NEELAM
SHARMA
Signing Date:23.05.2026
14:36:40