The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to expunge adverse observations made by the Delhi High Court against the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) in proceedings relating to wrestler Vinesh Phogat and her participation in the Asian Games 2026 selection trials.
The Bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Aravind Kumar held that the challenge mounted by the federation had become infructuous in light of subsequent developments, while clarifying that its order should not be construed as an endorsement of the findings recorded by the High Court.
The Court observed that Phogat had already participated in the selection trials pursuant to an earlier order passed by the Supreme Court on May 29. Since the purpose of the litigation had effectively been exhausted, the Special Leave Petition filed by the WFI no longer survived for adjudication.
While disposing of the matter, the Bench clarified that the closure of the proceedings would not amount to affirmation or reiteration of the observations made by the Delhi High Court. The Court expressly stated that all issues were being kept open and that its order should not be interpreted as endorsing the findings recorded against the federation.
The dispute arose from a judgment delivered by the Delhi High Court on May 22. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia had directed that Phogat be permitted to participate in the Asian Games selection trials scheduled for May 30 and 31 after finding that the WFI’s selection policy was exclusionary in nature.
The High Court had observed that Phogat was unable to satisfy the federation’s eligibility criteria primarily because she had taken a break from competitive wrestling due to maternity leave. It held that motherhood could not become a ground for exclusion or marginalisation of female athletes and emphasised the need to ensure equal opportunities for women sportspersons returning to competition after maternity-related interruptions.
The Division Bench had also strongly criticised a show-cause notice issued by the WFI to Phogat, describing the action as vindictive and deplorable. The federation had referred to Phogat’s disqualification from the Paris Olympics for being overweight as a “national embarrassment” or “national shame”. The High Court took exception to the language used in the notice and observed that it prima facie reflected mala fides on the part of the federation.
Aggrieved by these findings, the WFI approached the Supreme Court seeking intervention. On May 29, a Bench of the Supreme Court allowed Phogat to participate in the selection trials while keeping the matter pending for further consideration. At that stage, the Court had expressed reservations regarding certain aspects of the High Court’s reasoning, observing that substantial attention had been devoted to the issue of motherhood whereas the controversy also involved compliance with anti-doping and testing requirements.
The Supreme Court had noted that Phogat had allegedly missed a doping test conducted earlier this year and that the explanation furnished by her to the International Testing Agency regarding her absence was not considered satisfactory. Nevertheless, the Court declined to interfere with the permission granted to her for participation in the trials.
Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s order, Phogat participated in the selection process but ultimately failed to secure qualification for the Asian Games.
When the matter was taken up again, Senior Advocate D.N. Goburdhun, appearing for the WFI, urged the Court to expunge the High Court’s observations from paragraph 31 onwards. He argued that findings relating to mala fides and criticism of the federation’s conduct could prejudice proceedings that remain pending before a Single Judge of the Delhi High Court. It was contended that the adverse observations would effectively constrain the adjudication of issues that are yet to be finally determined.
The Supreme Court, however, declined to grant the relief sought and proceeded to dispose of the Special Leave Petition as infructuous. The Court observed that the pending proceedings before the Single Judge would be decided independently and that the issues arising therein remained open for adjudication.
The controversy traces its origins to the WFI’s selection criteria for the Asian Games trials, which restricted eligibility to medal winners from specified competitions held during 2025 and 2026. Phogat did not participate in those events, having announced her retirement after the 2024 Olympics before returning to competitive wrestling in December 2025.
The federation subsequently issued a show-cause notice accusing her of indiscipline, anti-doping violations and failure to comply with mandatory return-to-competition procedures prescribed under the regulations of the United World Wrestling. According to the WFI, Phogat had not completed the required six-month notice period before attempting her comeback. The notice also referred to alleged whereabouts failures under anti-doping protocols and criticised her Paris Olympics disqualification.
Phogat denied the allegations and maintained that both the World Anti-Doping Agency and the International Testing Agency had cleared her to compete from January 2026 onwards. She contended that the federation’s actions were arbitrary, unfair and intended to force her retirement from the sport.
With the completion of the selection trials and Phogat’s participation therein, the Supreme Court has now closed the proceedings while leaving all substantive questions regarding the validity of the WFI’s actions and selection policy open for determination in the pending proceedings before the Delhi High Court.
The post Supreme Court declines request to expunge Delhi High Court remarks against WFI in Vinesh Phogat selection trials dispute appeared first on India Legal.