The Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, disposed of the petition filed by three‑time Olympian Vinesh Phogat on Monday. The petition contested the wrestler’s initial exclusion from the Asian Games trials and the show‑cause notice dated 9 May 2026 issued by the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI). The court directed the WFI to reach a decision on the show‑cause notice within a period of two weeks and to communicate that decision both to the court and to the petitioner.
Justice Sharma observed that the petitioner remains at liberty to file a separate plea challenging the WFI’s selection policy. The court made it clear that the disposal of the present petition does not preclude Phogat from raising substantive objections to the criteria governing selection for national competitions.
The background of the dispute shows that Phogat was barred from participating in the Asian Games trials after the WFI limited eligibility to medal‑winning performances in certain events held during 2025 and 2026. Phogat had not taken part in any of those competitions. She had announced her retirement after the 2024 Olympics but resumed training in December 2025. The WFI issued the show‑cause notice accusing her of indiscipline, alleged anti‑doping rule violations, and failure to observe the mandatory six‑month notice period stipulated by United World Wrestling regulations before attempting a comeback after retirement. The notice also referenced her disqualification at the 2024 Paris Olympics for being overweight, describing it as a “national embarrassment”, and alleged whereabouts failures under anti‑doping protocols.
Phogat rejected the allegations, asserting that both the World Anti‑Doping Agency and the International Testing Agency had cleared her to compete from January 2026 onward. She contended that the federation’s actions were aimed at forcing her into retirement and were politically motivated.
Procedurally, a single judge had initially declined to grant any interim relief in Phogat’s favour. Subsequently, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court allowed her to participate in the Asian Games trials. The Division Bench noted that the WFI’s selection policy was exclusionary insofar as it prevented Phogat from competing solely because she was on maternity leave, and it held that motherhood cannot constitute a ground for excluding or marginalising female athletes. The Bench further criticised the WFI for issuing a “deplorable” show‑cause notice and characterised the federation’s conduct as vindictive.
The WFI challenged the Division Bench’s observations of India, which declined to expunge the High Court’s remarks. Following that, Phogat took part in the Asian Games trials but did not qualify for the team. The present order of the Delhi High Court brings the immediate litigation to a close while preserving the petitioner’s right to pursue a fresh challenge to the selection policy.
Counsel for Phogat included Senior Advocate Raj Shekhar Rao assisted by advocates Ritwik Prakash, Vishakha Gupta, Aashita Khanna and Neil M Goswami. The Wrestling Federation of India was represented by advocate Hemant Phalpher.