New Delhi: The Delhi High Court Thursday denied Olympic wrestler Vinesh Phogat permission to participate in selection trials for the 2026 Senior World Wrestling Championships.
Phogat had challenged her exclusion from the trials under a 7 September circular issued by the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) which prescribed eligibility based on participation in specified 2025–2026 competitions—events she missed due to pregnancy, childbirth, and post-partum recovery.
The circular on WFI’s selection policy has also been challenged in the court.
Denying interim relief, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma ruled that granting a special relaxation to one athlete would be unfair to others and open a ‘Pandora’s box’ of exemption claims. The court emphasised that selection for national representation requires a uniform and performance-based process that cannot be bypassed at an interim stage.
Phogat had duly notified sporting and anti-doping authorities of her 2024-25 sabbatical. Acting on behalf of United World Wrestling (UWW), the International Testing Agency (ITA) confirmed on 3 July 2025 that she was eligible to compete starting 1 January 2026.
The WFI’s selection policy dated 25 February, however, framed eligibility around qualifying competitions held in 2025 and 2026, effectively excluding Phogat.
When Phogat registered for the Senior Open Ranking Tournament at Gonda in May, the WFI issued a first Show Cause Notice (SCN) on 9 May, declaring her ineligible till 26 June. A Delhi High Court Division Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia intervened on 22 May, permitting her to compete in the Asian Games Selection Trials, where she reached the semi-finals in the 53-kg category. The WFI issued a second SCN on 17 June, alleging misconduct during those trials.
Phogat, a three-time Olympian, has three Commonwealth Games golds, two World Championships bronze medals and a gold medal each at the Asian Games and Asian Championships.
Also Read: What SC said as it cleared path for Vinesh Phogat to take part in Asian Games trials
Pending notices, unavailed hearings
In weighing her request for interim relief, the High Court scrutinised ongoing disciplinary proceedings and Phogat’s failure to attend scheduled hearings. Following a 6 July court directive ordering the WFI to conclude the first SCN within two weeks, the federation issued notices fixing committee meetings for 22 July, 7 August, 2 September, and 9 September.
Phogat did not appear at the first three meetings, raising objections regarding the non-disclosure of the disciplinary committee’s composition. Justice Sharma pointed out that despite being aware of the July time-frame, Phogat approached the court at an ‘imminent’ stage, just days prior to the 14 September trials at Indira Gandhi Stadium in New Delhi, seeking an exemption from the prescribed circular.
‘Pandora’s box’
The High Court firmly rejected the submission that provisional entry could be granted simply because Phogat requested an opportunity to participate rather than automatic selection. Addressing this distinction, Justice Sharma observed that “participation in the Selection Trials itself is subject to the eligibility criteria prescribed by respondent No. 1 (WFI)”.
Refusing to grant a customised relaxation, the court held that directing the WFI to permit Phogat to participate provisionally “would, in substance, amount to carving out an exception, only in her favour, from the eligibility criteria applicable to all other athletes”.
Warning against establishing a precedent that disrupts uniform administration, the order noted: “Permitting the petitioner to participate by granting her a special dispensation, therefore, would not only be unfair to other athletes across the country who may have a similar grievance against the policy but are not before this court, but would also have the effect of opening a Pandora’s box, with other athletes seeking similar exceptions from the prescribed eligibility criteria.”
The judge further stressed that “the interest of the country in ensuring that its representatives are selected through a fair, uniform and performance-based process is of paramount importance”.
Beyond procedural issues, Justice Sharma, in her 16-page judgement reflected on the broader systemic dilemma facing female athletes who choose to start a family. “This court is also conscious that the larger question as to how motherhood and maternity are to be balanced against the demands of a sporting career, and whether an athlete ought to require to choose between motherhood and pursuing her career, merits careful consideration.”
However, the court made it clear that such complex policy questions must be determined during final adjudication of the writ petition, rather than through interim orders. “Till the validity and applicability of the selection policy itself is adjudicated upon, the eligibility criteria prescribed thereunder cannot simply be set aside or wished away in the case of one athlete, and a special class cannot be carved out in favour of the petitioner, particularly when other athletes similarly placed may also face a comparable dilemma and may be required to make similar choices in the course of their sporting career,” the court said.
Consequently, the High Court dismissed Phogat’s interim application without passing any final judgement on the validity of the 7 September circular or the pending disciplinary notices, making her ineligible to participate in the upcoming selection trials for the Senior World Wrestling Championships in Astana, Kazakhstan, scheduled for 24 October to 1 November 2026.
Phogat’s main petition seeking a mandatory, maternity-sensitive framework for women athletes returning to competitive sports remains pending, with the court scheduling further arguments for 29 September.
(Edited by Nardeep Singh Dahiya)
Also Read: Vinesh Phogat, WFI, and the Delhi HC judgment that said motherhood cannot become a disability