NEW DELHI: The Delhi excessive court docket has refused to intervene with the exemption granted to prime wrestlers Vinesh Phogat and Bajrang Punia from Asian Games trials based mostly on consultants’ opinions.

“The unanimous decision taken by the committee on 12.07.2023 not to expose respondents, who have been termed as elite athletes, to injuries during trials cannot be said to be arbitrary or perverse. It is nobody’s case that (Punia and Phogat) are not well known in their respective categories. In fact, both the athletes are in the World Top 10 rankings and, therefore, the categorisation of these athletes as elite athletes also cannot be said to be perverse or arbitrary,” the HC noticed.
The HC reiterated that court docket’s can’t “substitute their opinions to the opinions arrived at by the experts unless the court is satisfied that the decision taken by the experts is perverse or illegal. The function of the Court is only to see that the decision has been arrived at in a good faith and the experts have acted reasonably. It is not the function of the courts to sit in judgment over the decision arrived at by the experts”.

Justice Prasad highlighted that the choice of the ad-hoc committee of the WFI, which includes consultants within the subject of wrestling, to exempt the elite athletes from choice trials is not only to stop them from struggling any harm within the choice course of but in addition because of their previous performances on this planet wrestling occasions.
“Unlike other sports, there is a greater risk of injury being caused to the players during trials in sports like wrestling and boxing. The Asian Games are to begin in about two months’ time and in case injury is caused to the elite athletes, who are medal probables, the time for recovery is extremely low and, therefore, the decision taken by the committee to exempt them from selection trials in order to ensure that they are not to exposed to injuries during trials cannot be said to be arbitrary or capricious or perverse,” it added.
The HC pressured it was not commenting on deserves of the petitioner grapplers who “have also excelled in the field of wrestling but this court is not inclined to sit in appeal over the decision taken by the committee as the same cannot be said to be arbitrary. It further noted that WFI had last year also exempted Punia from undergoing trials for his participation in the World Championship and he came back with a medal.

“It is neither the contention of the petitioners nor can it be said that the WFI has acted against the interest of the country or that the decision has been taken because of certain extraneous circumstances or in order to favour anyone,” the HC concluded.