New Delhi: A division bench of the Delhi High Court has permitted wrestler Vinesh Phogat to participate in the Asian Games selection trials scheduled on May 30 and 31.
A bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, in its verdict released on Saturday, observed that WFI’s selection criteria for the Games—only wrestlers who won medals in 2025 are eligible while earlier performances are not considered—were exclusionary. It left no discretion for the federation to consider accomplished athletes like Phogat, who is making a comeback after childbirth, and also marked a significant deviation from past practice.
In its 15-page order delivered on Friday, the court observed that two-time world medallist Phogat’s exclusion from the selection trials was directly linked to her sabbatical and the temporary eligibility requirements. It noted that her maternity period and subsequent recovery coincided with the timing of the championships necessary to satisfy the eligibility criteria, thereby affecting her ability to qualify for the trials. It said Phogat, being an internationally acclaimed athlete, has brought several laurels to the country.
“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,” the court order said.
“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 a 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 that period.”
The bench said WFI’s show cause notice barring Phogat from domestic events appeared “pre-mediated” and sought to reopen settled issues. It termed as deplorable WFI’s observations in its May 9 notice that declared Phogat was ineligible to participate in domestic events due to her disqualification after failing to make the weight before the final at the 2024 Paris Olympics and that it was a national embarrassment. The court said the remarks were made despite the ruling by the Court for Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which found no wrongdoing on her part. “Such observations are retrograde and show the mala fide intent of the Respondent 1 (WFI) by being vindictive against the appellant,” the order said.
The court directed WFI to videotape the trials and asked the Centre to appoint two independent observers from the Sports Authority of India and Indian Olympic Association for it. The observers have been directed to submit their report before the single judge hearing Phogat’s challenge to the Asian Games selection policy.
Earlier this year, WFI framed its Asian Games selection policy and, on May 6, issued a circular restricting eligibility for the trials to medal winners of the 2025 senior nationals, 2026 Senior Federation Cup, 2026 U20 nationals and U23 nationals, provided the events were held before the trials. The circular also clarified that past performances would not be considered, effectively rendering Phogat ineligible as the qualification window overlapped with her sabbatical, return-to-training phase, pregnancy-related break and post-partum recovery period.
On May 9, WFI further issued a notice barring Phogat from participating in domestic competitions till June 26. The WFI alleged indiscipline, violations related to anti-doping regulations, the disqualification at the Paris Olympics, and the failure to complete a mandatory six-month notice period required for athletes returning from retirement under United World Wrestling anti-doping rules.
Phogat petitioned the high court through senior advocate Rajshekhar Rao, along with advocate Ritwik Prakash, challenging the selection policy and the notice on grounds that earlier WFI regulations governing selection for major international events, including the Asian Games, expressly preserved discretionary consideration in favour of iconic wrestlers such as Olympic and world championship medallists. It added that the eligibility framework created a closed and inflexible gatekeeping mechanism without any accommodation for maternity-related absence and postpartum recovery.
A single judge on May 18 declined permission for her to participate in the trials, and Phogat then appealed to the division bench.
WFI counsel Hemant Phalper argued that Phogat was ineligible as she had voluntarily retired from wrestling and had not competed in the required tournaments. He maintained that WFI lacked the authority to grant exemptions to these rules and stressed that the circular applied equally to all athletes without targeting or discriminating against Phogat.
The Centre’s counsel clarified that the sports ministry had not barred Phogat from the trials but could not interfere in WFI’s decisions, citing possible international sporting repercussions. However, if permitted to compete, independent oversight and live airing of the trials would ensure transparency.
