In a letters patent appeal filed before the Delhi High Court to assail an order dated 18-05-2026 by a Single Judge in a writ petition filed to challenge the Asian Games Selection Policy (Policy) and the Selection Criteria Circular (Circular) by which Vinesh Phogat, the appellant, was excluded from participation in the selection trials of the Asian Games 2026, a Division Bench of the Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia permitted Vinesh Phogat to participate in the selection trials for the 2026 Asian Games.
On 06-12-2024, the International Testing Agency (ITA) informed Vinesh Phogat that she had been included in the United World Wrestling (UWW) Registered Testing Pool. On 14-12-2024 and 15-12-2024, Vinesh Phogat formally intimated the ITA that she would remain on sabbatical until August 2025 as she was in her family way. On 30-06-2025, Vinesh Phogat informed the ITA and UWW that her sabbatical had concluded and that she intended to resume training. This was acknowledged by the ITA, and an email dated 03-07-2025 stated that Vinesh Phogat would be eligible to compete from 01-01-2026.
In July 2025, Vinesh Phogat gave birth to her first child, and on 12-12-2025, she informed the Director General of the Sports Authority of India (SAI), the UWW, and the TOPS Programme that she had resumed wrestling and was looking forward to future international competitions, including the 2028 Olympics. After the publication of the Selection Policy and the Selection Circular, the Wrestling Federation issued a show-cause notice dated 09-05-2026, seeking an explanation regarding the Paris Olympic weigh-in issue adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration of Sports. Thereafter, the Federation rendered Vinesh Phogat ineligible to participate in any of its competitions and events till 26-06-2026, including the Senior Open Ranking Tournament at Gonda. Aggrieved, Vinesh Phogat preferred the said writ petition.
The said writ petition also sought the quashing of the said show-cause notice, as well as a direction to the Wrestling Federation of India for carrying out the selection trials under the supervision and observation of the observers nominated by the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS) to ensure fairness in the election process.
By the impugned order, notice was issued in the writ petition and granted liberty to Vinesh Phogat to file a comprehensive reply to the show-cause notice, while directing the Wrestling Federation to logically conclude the show-cause notice before 06-07-2026. Vinesh Phogat was aggrieved as the impugned order did not grant any interim protection during the pendency of the writ petition, despite the selection trials being scheduled for 30-05-2026 and 31-05-2026.
The Court stated that a legal and regulatory framework that either expressly or impliedly disadvantages a woman due to pregnancy or post-partum recovery would clearly violate the principles of non-discrimination as per Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. The Court said that it could not remain oblivious to the physiological realities and disadvantages related to childbirth that female athletes undergo during maternity. It was noted that Vinesh Phogat’s exclusion from the selection trial was directly attributable to the sabbatical and temporary retirement from her sporting activities. The Court stated that the duration of her maternity coincided with the schedule of the championships that she was required to participate in to be eligible for selection trials of the 2026 Asian Games.
The Court found it deplorable that the Wrestling Federation had addressed the mishap in the 2024 Paris Olympics, which led to Vinesh Phogat’s disqualification as a ‘national embarrassment’. It was stated that such observations made in the show-cause notice, despite the Award by the CAS, appeared to be pre-mediated, misconceived, and ought to have been avoided. The Court found that such observations were retrograde and reflected the Federation’s mala fide intent.
The Court stated that the standard for selection trials showed a significant deviation from past practice and held that the Policy and Circular were exclusionary in nature, as they did not afford the Federation any discretion to consider iconic players like Vinesh Phogat in view of her sabbatical. It was stated that a woman cannot be prejudiced in any manner in her employment, career, etc., due to maternity. The Court found it necessary to permit Vinesh Phogat to participate in the selection trials in the interest of sport and justice.
It was said that the circumstances were beyond her control, and while the legality of the Policy, Circular, and outcome of the show-cause notice would be examined by the Single Judge, the Court permitted Vinesh Phogat to participate in the selection trials. The Wrestling Federation was directed to video-record the selection trials, and two independent observers from SAI, as well as the Indian Olympic Association, were directed to observe the selection trials and submit a report before the Single Judge.
