Case Details

  • Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 19503/2026 filed by Wrestling Federation of India, arising from High Court of Delhi judgment dated 22‑05‑2026 in LPA No. 399/2026.
  • Supreme Court of India hearing on 04‑06‑2026; Bench: Justice Pamidighantam and Justice Aravind Kumar (Partial Court Working Days Bench).
  • Related interlocutory applications: IA No. 168860/2026, IA No. 169128/2026, IA No. 169132/2026, IA No. 169127/2026.

Parties Involved

  • Petitioner: Wrestling Federation of India.
  • Respondents: Vinesh Phogat & Ors.
  • Petitioner’s counsel: D N Goburdhan (Sr. Adv), Hemant Phalpher, Karishmit Keswani, Vipin Kumar Bharti, Rohan Kochar, Akash Yadav, Towseef Ahmad Dar (AOR), R. Arunadhri Iyer (AOR), etc.
  • Respondent’s counsel: Shubhranshu Padhi, Aman Varma (AOR), Aashita Khanna, Riya Wasade, Ritwik Prakash, Neil Goswami, etc.
  • Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pamidighantam, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar.

Issues / Allegations / Violations

  • Petition sought exemption from filing copy of the impugned judgment of the High Court and sought Special Leave to appeal the High Court’s order.
  • The underlying dispute concerns the High Court’s findings in LPA No. 399/2026 (substantive details not provided in the order).

Findings & Observations

  • The Court granted permission to file the Special Leave Petition (C) Diary No. 33272/2026.
  • Subsequent development rendered the SLPs infructuous; consequently, the Court dismissed them as infructuous.
  • The dismissal is expressly stated not to be construed as approval of the High Court’s findings or observations.
  • The legal questions raised by petitioner’s counsel remain open for consideration in a suitable future case.

Penalties / Settlements / Directions

  • No monetary penalties or settlements were imposed.
  • The Court directed that any pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of.

Corrective Actions & Future Obligations

  • The questions of law identified by the petitioner’s counsel are to be kept open for future adjudication.
  • Parties must comply with the dismissal order and any disposal of interlocutory applications.

Final Ruling & Enforcement

  • Permission to file SLP granted; later SLP dismissed as infructuous.
  • Dismissal does not endorse the High Court’s findings.
  • The matter is closed pending any future appropriate case to address the outstanding legal questions.