Motherhood Cannot Be Treated As Professional Impediment: Delhi High Court Allows Vinesh Phogat To Participate In Asian Games Trials
The Court observed that the Wrestling Federation of India’s selection framework, which excluded Vinesh Phogat from the Asian Games selection trials owing to her maternity-related sabbatical, required judicial scrutiny on grounds of arbitrariness and discrimination.
The Delhi High Court has permitted wrestler Vinesh Phogat to participate in the Selection Trials for the Asian Games 2026, holding that motherhood cannot be treated as a professional impediment or a circumstance warranting adverse treatment against a woman athlete.
The Court observed that the Wrestling Federation of India’s (“WFI”) Selection Policy and Circular appeared exclusionary in nature since they failed to provide any discretion for considering iconic athletes who had taken maternity-related sabbaticals from the sport.
The Court further observed that a legal or regulatory framework which expressly or impliedly disadvantages a woman on account of pregnancy or post-partum recovery would violate the principles of non-discrimination under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
The Court was hearing a Letters Patent Appeal filed by wrestler Vinesh Phogat challenging an interim order passed by the Single Judge in her pending writ petition challenging the WFI’s Asian Games Selection Policy dated 25.02.2026 and Selection Criteria Circular dated 06.05.2026.
The writ petition also challenged a Show Cause Notice issued by the WFI, which rendered her ineligible to participate in WFI competitions till 26.06.2026.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed: “Becoming a mother is a great virtue, and the laws and society have always given respect to mothers. Becoming a mother is both an intimate transformation and a social moment. Across cultures and histories, motherhood has been celebrated and supported in widely different ways. The Appellant, being an internationally acclaimed athlete, has brought several laurels to the country. It is acknowledged that motherhood cannot be treated as a professional impediment or a circumstance warranting adverse treatment.”
Further, while stating that “becoming a mother can never become a disability”, the Bench directed that “the Appellant shall be permitted to participate in the Selection Trials for Asian Games, 2026”.
Senior Advocate Raj Shekhar Rao appeared for the appellant. Advocate Hemant Phalpher appeared for the respondents.
Background
The appellant Vinesh Phogat challenged the WFI’s Asian Games Selection Policy dated 25.02.2026 and the Selection Criteria Circular dated 06.05.2026 to the extent they restricted eligibility for participation in the Asian Games Selection Trials only to medal winners of specified domestic tournaments conducted during 2025 and 2026.
The appellant contended that due to her duly disclosed maternity-related sabbatical, childbirth and post-partum recovery, she could not participate in the qualifying championships prescribed under the impugned framework.
The record showed that on 06.12.2024, the International Testing Agency (“ITA”) informed the appellant that she had been included in the United World Wrestling Registered Testing Pool. Thereafter, on 14.12.2024 and 15.12.2024, the appellant informed the ITA that she would remain on sabbatical till August 2025 owing to her pregnancy and further clarified that the retirement from wrestling was temporary in nature.
Subsequently, on 30.06.2025, the appellant informed the ITA and United World Wrestling that her sabbatical had concluded and that she intended to resume training. The ITA thereafter acknowledged her return and expressly stated on 03.07.2025 that she would be eligible to compete from 01.01.2026 onwards.
The appellant gave birth to her first child in July 2025 and resumed training thereafter.
The appellant further challenged a Show Cause Notice dated 09.05.2026 issued by the WFI relating to the Paris Olympic weigh-in issue and contended that the same sought to reopen issues already adjudicated by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“CAS”).
Before the Single Judge, no interim protection was granted, and the writ petition was listed for hearing on 06.07.2026, whereas the Selection Trials were scheduled for 30.05.2026 and 31.05.2026. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant preferred the present appeal seeking interim permission to participate in the trials.
Court’s Observation
At the outset, the Court made extensive observations regarding motherhood and the position of women athletes during pregnancy and post-partum recovery.
The Court observed: “Motherhood in India and across the world is celebrated. Becoming mother is a great virtue and the laws and society always have given respect to mothers.”
The Bench further observed: “The motherhood must be viewed as a natural and deeply significant aspect of life that deserves accommodation and institutional sensitivity.”
The Court noted that female athletes undergo extraordinary physical challenges during pregnancy and post-partum recovery and observed that sporting frameworks cannot ignore such physiological realities.
The Court held: “The law must ensure that motherhood does not become a ground for exclusion or marginalisation of female athletes such as the Appellant.”
The Division Bench observed that the WFI’s Selection Policy and Circular created a rigid and mechanically exclusionary eligibility framework by limiting participation in the Selection Trials only to medal winners of specified tournaments held during 2025 and 2026.
The Court noted that due to the appellant’s maternity-related sabbatical and childbirth, the qualifying tournaments prescribed under the Policy coincided with her pregnancy and post-partum recovery period.
The Court observed that the appellant had made out a prima facie case demonstrating arbitrariness and discrimination in the impugned framework.
The Court further observed: “The Policy and the Circular are clearly exclusionary in nature as it does not give any discretion to Respondent No. 1 to consider iconic players like the Appellant in view of the sabbatical taken on account of her maternity leave.”
The Court also examined earlier practices of the WFI and noted that previous selection frameworks provided discretion to permit participation of iconic athletes without requiring them to undergo trials in certain circumstances.
The Bench referred to the Guidelines for National Coaching Camps dated 29.04.2025, which empowered the WFI to select iconic players directly for the Asian Games without requiring participation in coaching camps for trial eligibility.
The Court further noted that the Invitation dated 22.12.2023 for the Senior National Wrestling Championship specifically empowered the Selection Committee to grant special permission to iconic players, including Olympic and World Championship medallists.
The Court also examined the Show Cause Notice issued to the appellant concerning the Paris Olympic weigh-in controversy. The Bench observed that the CAS Award dated 16.08.2024 had already recorded that there was “no suggestion of any wrongdoing” on the part of the appellant.
Criticising the language used in the SCN, the Court observed: “The observations made by Respondent No. 1 in the SCN with regard to the mishap in 2024 Paris Olympic Games, which led to disqualification of the Appellant, by calling it ‘national embarrassment’ is deplorable.”
The Court further observed: “Such observations are retrograde and show the mala fide intent of Respondent No. 1 by being vindictive against the Appellant.”
The Court noted that if interim protection was denied, the writ petition itself would become infructuous since the Selection Trials were scheduled before the next date of hearing before the Single Judge. The Court therefore held that pending adjudication of the writ petition, the appellant’s interest required protection.
The Bench observed: “Except for the Appellant’s motherhood and the SCN issued by Respondent No. 1, she would be entitled to participate in the Selection Trials.”
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court held that the appellant had made out a prima facie case warranting interim protection pending adjudication of the writ petition challenging the WFI’s Selection Policy, Circular and Show Cause Notice.
Accordingly, the Court directed that Vinesh Phogat shall be permitted to participate in the Selection Trials for the Asian Games 2026 scheduled on 30.05.2026 and 31.05.2026.
The Court further directed that the Selection Trials shall be video-recorded and that the Union Government shall nominate two independent observers from the Sports Authority of India and the Indian Olympic Association to oversee the trials and submit a report before the Single Judge in the pending writ proceedings.
The Court clarified that all observations made in the judgment were confined to the limited issue of interim participation in the Selection Trials and that the pending writ petition shall be decided independently on merits by the Single Judge without being influenced by the observations contained in the order.
Cause Title: Vinesh Phogat v. Wrestling Federation of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:4661-DB)
Appearances
Appellant: Senior Advocate Raj Shekhar Rao with Advocates Ritwik Prakash, Vishakha Gupta, Aashita Khanna and Neil M. Goswami.
Respondents: Advocates Hemant Phalpher and Karishmit Keswani; SPC Udit Dedhiya with Advocates Apurva Sachdev and Preyansh Gupta
