Delhi HC Denies Vinesh Phogat Interim Relief To Compete In World Championship Trials [Read Judgment]

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has declined to grant interim relief to wrestler Vinesh Phogat seeking permission to participate in the Selection Trials for the 2026 Senior World Wrestling Championships, holding that the eligibility criteria prescribed by the Wrestling Federation of India applied uniformly to all athletes and could not be relaxed in her favour alone at the interim stage.

Dr. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma was hearing an application filed in a writ petition by which the petitioner had sought directions to the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) to formulate a fair, transparent and structured framework governing the return of women athletes to competitive sport after pregnancy, childbirth and post-partum recovery, so that such absence does not by itself disadvantage them in accessing selection opportunities.

The petitioner's senior counsel submitted that the Circular dated 07.09.2026, prescribing eligibility criteria for the World Championship Selection Trials, perpetuated an exclusionary framework already found prima facie arbitrary and discriminatory by a Division Bench in an earlier round of litigation. It was argued that the petitioner did not claim any automatic right to selection but sought only an opportunity to compete, having already demonstrated her return to the sport by reaching the semi-final of the Asian Games Selection Trials held in May 2026. It was further submitted that WFI could not rely on her non-participation at a Gonda tournament after having itself barred her from it through a show cause notice, and that pending disciplinary proceedings could not operate as an automatic bar to participation.

Counsel for WFI opposed the application, submitting that the petitioner had no vested right to participate without satisfying the eligibility criteria, which applied uniformly to all athletes and had not been relaxed even by the earlier Division Bench order. It was submitted that several qualifying competitions under the new Circular were held after the petitioner's sabbatical had ended, yet she had not participated, and that she had also failed to avail three separate opportunities to appear before the Disciplinary Committee in relation to two pending show cause notices.

The background, as recorded by the court, shows that the petitioner had remained away from competitive wrestling during 2024-2025 on account of pregnancy, childbirth and post-partum recovery, and was cleared by the International Testing Agency to compete from January 2026. Her exclusion from the Asian Games Selection Trials under the WFI's earlier policy had led to litigation, in which a Division Bench made prima facie observations that the policy was arbitrary and exclusionary and permitted her to compete in those trials, where she reached the semi-final. WFI subsequently issued a second show cause notice alleging misconduct during those very trials, and this notice, along with an earlier one, remained pending and undecided despite repeated Committee meetings that the petitioner did not attend.

The court held that the earlier Division Bench order could not be read as conferring a continuing exemption from eligibility criteria for future competitions, since it had been passed in the specific context of the Asian Games policy and a show cause notice that appeared pre-mediated. It observed that directing WFI to allow the petitioner to participate provisionally would, in substance, amount to “carving out an exception, only in her favour” from criteria applicable to all other athletes, which could unfairly affect similarly placed athletes not before the court and could not be granted without first adjudicating the validity of the policy itself.

The court acknowledged that the broader question of how motherhood and maternity are to be balanced against the demands of a sporting career merited careful consideration, and that the petitioner's circumstances would be examined at the stage of final adjudication of the writ petition. However, without expressing any final opinion on the validity of the Circular or the merits of the pending disciplinary proceedings, the court was not inclined to grant interim relief at this stage.

The application seeking interim permission to participate in the Selection Trials was accordingly dismissed, with arguments in the main writ petition remaining part-heard and the matter listed for further hearing on 29.09.2026.

Appearances:

For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Senior Advocate with Ms. Aashita Khanna, Mr. Ritwik Prakash, Mr. Neil M. Goswami and Ms. Vishakha Gupta, Advocates.

For Respondent No. 1/WFI: Mr. Hemant Phalpher and Mr. Karishmit Keswani, Advocates.

For Respondent No. 2: Mr. Udit Dedhiya, SPC with Mr. Rahul Mourya, GP, and with Mr. Preyansh Gupta and Mr. Arihant Shrivardhan, Advocates.

For IOA: Ms. Kumudavalli Seetharaman and Ms. Geetika Vyas, Advocates.

For Respondent No. 4/CBI: Ms. Rajni Gupta, SPP-CBI with Mr. Shivendra Gupta and Mr. Siddharth Shekhar, Advocates.

Case Title: Vinesh Phogat vs. Wrestling Federation of India & Ors., W.P.(C) 12674/2026

[Read Judgment]