The Supreme Court has transferred all cases related to the elections of the Boxing Federation of India (BFI) to the Delhi High Court, ensuring a unified legal approach. This decision came after mutual consent from all parties involved.
"We have discussed the matter in open Court. Parties agree that Delhi High Court can be the appropriate forum to agitate all issues," the Supreme Court stated.
Read Also: High Courts Can Quash Domestic Violence Act Complaints Using Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court
The move aims to prevent multiple proceedings and conflicting orders across different courts. Cases pending before the Himachal Pradesh High Court have been dismissed, with the liberty given to petitioners to either initiate fresh cases in Delhi or join ongoing ones.
The Supreme Court has allowed the stay order issued by the Himachal Pradesh High Court, which had paused the BFI election process, to remain in effect for six weeks. During this period, parties can approach the Delhi High Court for continuation or modification of this stay.
"Ideally, we should have the viewpoint of one High Court," emphasized Justice Surya Kant.
Read Also: Supreme Court Forms SIT to Probe BJP Minister Vijay Shah’s Remarks Against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi
Context of the Case
The legal battle began when Anurag Thakur, a former Union Sports Minister and an executive member of the Himachal Pradesh Boxing Association (HPBA), challenged his disqualification from contesting the BFI elections. Thakur's nomination was rejected without prior notice, allegedly at the direction of Ajay Singh, the then-president of BFI.
Initially, a Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court had ruled in Thakur's favor, directing BFI to extend the nomination date. However, this decision was overturned by a Division Bench. Aggrieved by this, Thakur and HPBA approached the Supreme Court.
The conflict also revolved around a notification issued on March 7, which introduced new eligibility criteria for BFI's electoral college. This notification, issued after Ajay Singh's term ended, excluded several representatives, including Thakur.
Read Also: Supreme Court Stays Demolition of Bale Shah Peer Dargah, Orders Status Quo
"The notification, issued after the expiry of Mr. Ajay Singh's tenure, was not only arbitrary but also violated BFI's Memorandum and the National Sports Code," argued Thakur.
Thakur and HPBA argued that this notification was invalid, as it went against the BFI’s rules and the National Sports Code of India, 2011. They requested the court to declare the notification null and void.
While the respondents, including BFI, claimed that the issue was moot due to a change in international recognition of the BFI, the Supreme Court did not explore this argument. It focused solely on streamlining the legal proceedings to ensure a fair and consistent outcome.
Case Title: ANURAG SINGH THAKUR Versus AJAY SINGH AND ORS., Diary No. 25229-2025 (and connected cases)
