The Supreme Court on Monday refused to grant interim relief to dressage riders Anush Agarwalla and Sudipti Hajela, who challenged their exclusion from India’s dressage team for the 2026 Asian Games, while agreeing to examine the larger issue of institutionalising a transparent and uniform athlete selection process for national sporting events.
The Bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe dismissed the riders’ prayer for interim relief, observing that the Court was reluctant to interfere in individual sports selection disputes, particularly at the final stage before an international competition. It clarified that while individual grievances would not be reopened, it would continue to examine systemic issues relating to sports governance and selection mechanisms to ensure greater transparency and consistency in the future.
The Court issued notice in the pending proceedings concerning institutional reforms but made it clear that the controversy relating to the individual claims of the two riders stood concluded. It observed that judicial intervention in sports matters should ordinarily be confined to addressing institutional deficiencies rather than revisiting individual selection decisions at the last moment.
The dispute arose after Agarwalla and Hajela challenged the Delhi High Court’s refusal to interfere with the selection of India’s dressage team for the Asian Games scheduled to be held in Japan from September 19 to October 4, 2026. Dressage is an equestrian discipline in which riders and horses perform a series of prescribed movements before judges based on precision, control and harmony.
The two riders, who were members of India’s gold medal-winning dressage team at the 2022 Asian Games, challenged the June 16, 2026 selection list issued by the Ad Hoc Committee of the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI), under which Agarwalla was placed as the first reserve rider and Hajela as the second reserve, while four other riders were selected for the final squad.
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the riders, argued that the Delhi High Court’s Division Bench had found procedural lapses in the selection process and that the riders deserved consideration under the prescribed selection criteria. It was submitted that both athletes had been placed on the waiting list despite favourable findings regarding deficiencies in the selection exercise.
However, the Supreme Court observed that it could not continue interfering in individual selection disputes and reiterated that any judicial scrutiny would be confined to institutional reforms. The Bench noted that Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra was assisting the Court on broader issues relating to sports administration and indicated that it would examine whether the existing selection framework required standardisation and institutional safeguards.
The challenge stemmed from the July 6 judgment of the Delhi High Court, which upheld an earlier order of a Single Judge refusing to interfere with the selection process despite recording that the EFI had failed to strictly comply with certain provisions of its own selection criteria and had acted with undue haste while finalising the selection list.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia had held that although procedural deficiencies existed, it was not feasible to direct fresh selection trials because the deadline for submission of India’s final squad was July 15, 2026. The High Court observed that riders and horses were stationed in different countries and transporting horses to a common venue for fresh trials within the available timeframe was logistically impossible. It exercised judicial restraint in the larger interest of Indian sport and to avoid jeopardising the country’s participation at the Asian Games, while directing the EFI to strictly adhere to its selection criteria in future.
Earlier, on June 29, a Single Judge of the High Court had dismissed the petitions filed by Agarwalla and Hajela after holding that the selection criteria had been applied fairly and that there was no arbitrariness, perversity or procedural impropriety warranting judicial review. The Single Judge had also rejected objections relating to the calculation of Minimum Eligibility Requirements (MERs), interpretation of the selection criteria, the absence of additional selection trials and allegations of bias against the Selection Committee.
The matter had previously reached the Supreme Court after Justice KV Viswanathan recused himself from hearing the appeals. Following the recusal, the petitions were mentioned for urgent listing in view of the impending deadline for finalising India’s contingent for the Asian Games.
With the dismissal of the interim plea, the selected dressage team will continue to represent India at the Asian Games. However, the Supreme Court’s decision to examine broader issues concerning sports governance and institutionalising a transparent, consistent and legally sustainable selection process is expected to have wider implications for future athlete selection disputes across sporting disciplines.
The post Asian Games 2026: Supreme Court denies interim relief to dressage riders challenging Indian team selection appeared first on India Legal.