Court Seeks WFI Response to Phogat Petition

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought a response from the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) on a petition filed by Olympian Vinesh Phogat challenging two show-cause notices and the disciplinary proceedings that followed. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said the court was not issuing a formal notice at this stage and asked WFI's counsel to obtain instructions. The matter is scheduled for the next hearing on September 29.

Phogat has challenged show-cause notices dated May 9 and June 17, alleging that they form part of a continuing course of arbitrary, discriminatory and mala fide exercise of disciplinary powers by the federation, which has affected her return to competitive wrestling after maternity.

According to the petition, the International Testing Agency (ITA), through a communication dated July 3, 2025, confirmed that Phogat would be eligible to compete from January 1, 2026. She has claimed that despite complying with the requirements for her return to competition, WFI subsequently adopted an eligibility framework that effectively kept her out of the selection process.

Legal Arguments Over Show-Cause Notices

Phogat has argued that the first show-cause notice is itself legally unsustainable. She claims that it relies on the superseded UWW Anti-Doping Rules, 2015 and a "Rule 56" which, according to her, does not exist. She has also contended that the alleged whereabouts violation does not disclose the necessary ingredients of an Article 2.4 violation under the World Anti-Doping Code.

The first notice also concerns her participation in two weight categories during the March 2024 Selection Trials. Phogat has pointed out that her participation in both categories had been expressly permitted by the WFI's Ad-Hoc Committee.

The issue had earlier reached the Delhi High Court in proceedings concerning the first show-cause notice. Phogat has stated that the Division Bench made significant prima facie observations regarding the nature of the notice and the WFI's manner of proceeding. She was permitted to participate in the Asian Games Selection Trials.

The petition alleges that WFI altered its selection framework by recognising the Gonda tournament as an additional qualifying event during the pendency of earlier proceedings, despite WFI defending a fixed pool of qualified wrestlers before the Supreme Court. She alleges the change was not brought to the Supreme Court's notice when the matter was heard on May 29. Phogat participated in the Selection Trials on May 30, raising objections concerning the selection process and the draw.

Allegations of Non-Compliance and Procedural Issues

During the hearing, Phogat's lawyers, senior advocate Rajshekhar Rao and advocates Ashita Khanna and Ritwik Prakash, submitted that the federation failed to comply with the high court's July 6 direction to decide, within two weeks, the May 9 show-cause notice alleging indiscipline and violations of anti-doping regulations.

Rao further submitted that the WFI issued another notice on June 17 concerning Phogat's conduct during the selection trials. He added that despite repeated requests, the federation initially proceeded without disclosing the composition of the disciplinary committee and uploaded the same on WFI's website only on July 30, after Phogat raised specific objections in this regard.

He said the federation subsequently issued a communication dated August 21 scheduling the disciplinary proceedings for September 2. Despite a request to defer the proceedings, the WFI declined to do so and said that the disciplinary process would continue as scheduled.

WFI's counsel, Hemant Phalpher, submitted that Phogat had been called to appear before the disciplinary committee on two occasions but failed to do so. He said the federation now granted her a final opportunity to appear before the committee on September 2, place her submissions on record, and the court must direct her to appear.

The court, however, clarified that it was neither directing Phogat's appearance nor issuing notice on the petition, and had only asked WFI's counsel to obtain instructions.

Separate Petition on Maternity Return Framework

The same bench also issued notice in a separate petition filed by Phogat seeking implementation of a fair, transparent and structured framework governing the return of women athletes to competitive sport following pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum recovery, so that the same does not by itself operate to their disadvantage in accessing domestic competitions, selection trials or subsequent selection opportunities.

The court sought responses from the WFI, the Indian Olympic Association, and the central government by November 18.

The petition cited Phogat's own experience of having to re-enter the competitive pathway without accommodation or relaxation for the maternity period. It said eligibility criteria based on performances during maternity absence placed the petitioner at a structural disadvantage.

The petition also referenced a May 22 Delhi High Court order that observed WFI's selection criteria for the Asian Games was exclusionary.

Background

Phogat was among six women wrestlers who complained against former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and was a leading face of the protest in April and May 2023.