Delhi court acquitted former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in the sexual harassment case involving women wrestlers

A Delhi court, while acquitting former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and former WFI Assistant Secretary Vinod Tomar in the sexual harassment case filed by women wrestlers, has held that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.

In its detailed judgment which is not made public yet, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ashwini Panwar of the Rouse Avenue Courts observed that the versions of the complainants and witnesses contained material contradictions, while documentary evidence did not consistently support the alleged incidents. The court also noted the absence of contemporaneous complaints despite some of the alleged incidents having purportedly taken place in the presence of other persons.

The court went on to observe that the allegations appeared to be “false and fabricated” and formed part of a “deep conspiracy which seems to be politically motivated”.

The judgment further recorded that the alleged conspiracy appeared to have been hatched by coaches associated with the Mahadev Academy and two prosecution witnesses.

Court found material contradiction in allegations 

The court examined the individual allegations made by the complainants and found discrepancies concerning the dates, locations and circumstances of the alleged incidents.

In relation to one alleged incident connected with an Olympic qualification event, the court noted that the complainant had given different accounts regarding the location and year of the incident. While one version placed the incident in Turkey in 2015, a subsequent version stated that it had occurred in Mongolia in 2016.

The court observed that the discrepancy concerned fundamental particulars of the alleged occurrence and was not merely a variation in peripheral details.

The judgment also dealt with an alleged incident at a Delhi stadium in 2018. The court noted that several persons, including family members, coaches and athletes, were allegedly present, but no independent eyewitness came forward to support the prosecution's version.

The court further examined the evidence of a witness who stated that Singh had his hand on the complainant's shoulder. It noted that the witness did not refer to any forcible hug or any attempt by the complainant to push Singh away.

Two witnesses turned hostile

The court also placed significant reliance on the testimony of two witnesses who did not support the prosecution during trial.

According to the judgment, the two witnesses denied that they had been sexually harassed by Singh and stated that their earlier statements under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had been made under pressure and threat.

The court observed that nothing had been established by the prosecution to show that the witnesses had subsequently withdrawn their allegations because of any act attributable to Singh or Tomar.

The prosecution case, the court held, was further weakened by the fact that two of the five victims whose allegations formed the basis of the charges did not support the prosecution during trial.

Court questioned delay and subsequent conduct 

The court also considered the absence of contemporaneous complaints and the subsequent conduct of some of the complainants.

It noted that some of the wrestlers continued to interact with Singh after the alleged incidents and maintained cordial relations with him at public functions and family occasions.

The court further observed that allegations had been raised after a considerable lapse of time and that, in its assessment, some of the complaints appeared similar in language and circumstances.

According to the judgment, the circumstances created “more than sufficient reasonable doubt” regarding the prosecution's case.

The court observed that the allegations appeared to be rehearsed and planted, particularly in view of the circumstances in which the complaints were subsequently made.

Charges were framed in 2024

The case arose from allegations made by six women wrestlers against Singh, who was then serving as WFI president.

Delhi Police had filed a chargesheet against Singh in June 2023 under provisions relating to sexual harassment, outraging the modesty of a woman, stalking and criminal intimidation.

The trial court framed charges against Singh in May 2024 after finding sufficient material to proceed with the case. Tomar was separately charged with criminal intimidation in relation to one of the complainants.

A separate complaint involving a minor wrestler had earlier been withdrawn. Delhi Police subsequently filed a cancellation report in the POCSO case, bringing those proceedings to an end.

Case triggered major wrestlers' protest 

The allegations against Singh had led to a major protest by some of India's leading wrestlers at Delhi's Jantar Mantar in 2023. Wrestlers including Vinesh Phogat, Sakshi Malik and Bajrang Punia had participated in the protest, which continued for several weeks.

Following his acquittal, Singh maintained that the allegations were politically motivated and denied sexually harassing the wrestlers. The wrestlers have indicated that they intend to challenge the acquittal before the appellate court.

The acquittal at the trial stage does not amount to a finding that the alleged incidents could not have occurred; rather, the court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the charged offences beyond reasonable doubt.

Bench: ACJM Ashwini Panwar

Judgment Date: August 3, 2026

[Inputs: HT and India Today]

Tags: