NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday put on hold the Boxing Federation of India's (BFI) directive that restricted electoral representation in its upcoming polls to only elected members of affiliated state units. The order came in response to a petition filed by the Delhi Amateur Boxing Association (DABA), challenging the legitimacy of the federation's mandate. This could pave way for former sports minister Anurag Thakur to be included in the electoral college.
Justice Mini Pushkarna, presiding over the matter, ruled that the BFI’s controversial circular dated March 7 would remain inoperative till the next hearing. However, the election process itself would proceed as scheduled, with the declaration of results remaining subject to judicial scrutiny.
“The electoral process shall continue without being affected by the March 7 circular. Election results will be declared but shall remain contingent upon the outcome of the present petition,” the court stated while scheduling the next hearing for August.
The elections, slated for March 28, have already seen contentious exclusions from the final electoral college list. Notably, Rohit Jain and Neeraj Kant Bhatt, nominated by DABA, were disqualified based on the BFI’s circular. Even Anurag Thakur was deemed ineligible because of this.
Acknowledging the gravity of the issue, the court issued notices to the Centre and the BFI, granting them four weeks to file their responses. Observing a prima facie case in favour of the petitioner, the court underscored that barring DABA’s participation could cause irreparable prejudice.
As highlighted by this daily, the March 7 circular, sent to all state affiliates, stipulated that only legitimately elected representatives from state units, formally recognised through the BFI’s annual general meeting, would be eligible to cast votes. This directive has now come under intense legal scrutiny.
Represented by senior advocate Abhijat and advocate Vidushpat Singhania, DABA contended that the circular was in direct violation of the national sports code, BFI’s own election guidelines, and broader democratic
principles. The legal team further argued that BFI President Ajay Singh had issued the directive in a monopolistic fashion, strategically manipulating the electoral process to consolidate his position.
“The circular is nothing but an arbitrary misuse of power aimed at sidelining competition. The returning officer failed to address genuine grievances and allowed selective exclusions to ensure a preordained electoral outcome,” senior counsel Abhijat asserted.
DABA emphasised that it was not seeking to halt the election process but rather to ensure a fair and transparent contest. In response, senior advocate Dayan Krishnan, representing BFI, defended the electoral process, arguing that it had reached an advanced stage and any judicial interference at this juncture would be inappropriate. He maintained that the returning officer’s approval of the voter list aligned with BFI’s internal procedures and was supported by official interpretations from the Centre.
The Centre, however, appeared to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the March 7 directive, noting that it contradicted election norms and that certain internal deliberations on the matter had yet to culminate in a final decision.
Adding to the controversy, the petitioner highlighted a glaring inconsistency stating that during the 2016 BFI elections, Ajay Singh himself was included in the electoral college as a nominee from the Uttarakhand Boxing Association despite not being an elected representative. This, they argued, exposed the selective and arbitrary nature of the current electoral exclusions.