Punjab Wrestling Association tells ad-hoc panel not to exempt Bajrang Punia from Asian Games trials
New Delhi (PTI): Pressure continued to mount on IOA's ad-hoc panel for holding fair Asian Games trials with Punjab Wrestling Association (PWA) on Friday categorically telling the committee that it would field Jaskaran Singh in the 65kg competition and no wrestler should be picked in that weight class without a contest.
PWA Secretary General R S Kundu wrote a letter to panel head Bhupender Singh Bajwa, conveying that the committee must not hand exemption to any wrestler (read Bajang Punia) in the trials.
"It is injustice to Mr Jaskaran Singh if selection trial will not be conducted when it is a right of every eligible wrestler in each weight category to participate in selection trials for Asian Games 2023," the letter read.
"Punjab Wrestling Association strongly recommend the name of Mr Jaskaran Singh (for) freestyle wrestling and request the ad-hoc committee to conduct selection trials for Asian Games in 65kg weight category."
Bajrang Punia has made the 65kg weight class his own on the back of stupendous show in international tournaments. He won a bronze at the Tokyo Olympics and is a multiple medal winner at the World Championships.
Jaskaran had finished fourth at the U23 Asian Championship last month and is a silver medallist from the 2021 Cadet World Championship.
On Friday, 24 women wrestlers from Chhotu Ram Akhada had also requested the panel to give a fair chance to all wrestlers for a shot at the Asian Games-bound Indian squad.
The wrestlers had marked their mails to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, Sports Minister Anurag Thakur, Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar and IOA President PT Usha.
The ad-hoc panel is still undecided on the criteria and format for the trials that are scheduled to be held on July 22-23 at Indira Gandhi Stadium in New Delhi.
According to panel member Gian Singh, a meeting will be held on Saturday to decide on the final criteria and so far they have deliberated upon three options.
As per discussion among committee members, the panel can send the names of the six protesting wrestlers -- Bajrang, Vinesh Phogat, Sakshi Malik, Jitender Kinha, Satyawart Kadian and Sangeeta Phogat -- as reserves.
However, it will be extremely difficult to replace the names unless there is an injury to a selected wrestler.
The second option, the panel has discussed is that after holding initial trials, it will pick country's best four wrestlers in each category and ask them to fight against the six protesting wrestlers and the final winner goes to Hangzhou where the Games will begin on September 13.
The third option is to just go ahead with the trails on July 22-23 and whoever competes and wins, will book his place in the Indian team.
"Honestly speaking, Sangeeta and Jitender Kinha don't stand much chance in the trials while Sakshi and Satyawart have 50-50 chance, so the issue is basically about two wrestlers, Vinesh and Bajrang," said a panel member.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
