A Delhi court has issued notice on an appeal filed by four women wrestlers challenging the acquittal of former Wrestling Federation of India chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and co-accused Vinod Tomar in a sexual harassment case. The appeal has been listed for hearing on October 9.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: A Delhi court on Monday issued notice on an appeal filed by four women wrestlers against the acquittal of BJP leader and former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in a sexual harassment case.
The appeal also challenges the acquittal of former WFI Secretary Vinod Tomar, who was tried as a co-accused.
Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh of the Rouse Avenue Courts issued notice and listed the matter for further hearing on October 9, 2026.
The issuance of notice does not overturn the acquittal or amount to any finding against Singh or Tomar. It enables the appellate court to hear the respondents before deciding the legal challenge. The trial court’s acquittal continues to operate, and both men remain presumed innocent unless the judgment is set aside in accordance with law.
Wrestlers challenge the August 3 acquittal
The appeal challenges an order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on August 3, 2026, acquitting Singh and Tomar in the case arising from allegations made by women wrestlers.
The four appellants contend that the acquittal is unsustainable in law and rests on a manifestly erroneous and selective appreciation of the evidence. According to them, the trial court proceeded on conjectures and surmises, failed to apply binding legal principles and relied upon “archaic and stereotypical assumptions” concerning how a survivor of sexual harassment or assault is expected to behave.
The appeal argues that the evidence ought to have been assessed in the context of the complainants’ circumstances, including the alleged power imbalance between the women wrestlers and Singh, who was then heading the national wrestling body.
Trial court relied on delay, continued relations and contradictions
In its acquittal order, the trial court treated the complainants’ prolonged silence, their continued cordial relations with Singh and contradictions in their testimony as circumstances creating reasonable doubt about the prosecution case.
The court referred to photographs showing that Singh had been invited to family functions and wedding ceremonies. It observed that while fear of damage to the wrestlers’ careers could explain a delay in complaining, it found it difficult to understand why cordial relations were allegedly maintained with him for years.
The appellants contend that this reasoning applied a preconceived model of victim behaviour instead of evaluating whether continued interaction could be explained by professional dependence, fear, institutional hierarchy or the circumstances in which the complainants were placed.
Whether the trial court’s reasoning was legally impermissible or whether it constituted a possible view of the evidence is the central issue the appellate court will have to examine.
Charges faced by Singh and Tomar
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted Singh of charges under Sections 354, 354A and 506 Part I of the Indian Penal Code, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish the accusations beyond reasonable doubt.
Section 354 dealt with assault or criminal force intended to outrage a woman’s modesty, Section 354A with sexual harassment and Section 506 with criminal intimidation. Tomar was acquitted of the charge under Section 506 Part I.
The Delhi Police charge-sheet had invoked Sections 354, 354A, 354D and 506(1) of the IPC against the accused, with Section 109 concerning abetment additionally invoked against Tomar.
The allegations in the case related to incidents said to have occurred between 2016 and 2019 at the WFI office, Singh’s official residence and locations outside India. These allegations were not proved at trial, resulting in the acquittal now under challenge.
A separate cancellation report was filed in the POCSO case registered on the complaint of a minor wrestler. The present appeal concerns the acquittal arising from the case involving the adult complainants.
ALSO READ: Delhi Court Closes POCSO Case Against Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, Cites Lack Of Evidence
What the appellate court will examine
An appeal against acquittal is not a retrial from the beginning. The appellate court can reappreciate the evidence, but it ordinarily gives due weight to the strengthened presumption of innocence resulting from an acquittal.
Interference may be justified where the trial court ignored material evidence, applied an incorrect legal standard, relied on impermissible stereotypes or reached a view that could not reasonably be sustained on the record. On the other hand, where two reasonable views of the evidence are possible, an appellate court ordinarily does not substitute its assessment merely because it might have reached a different conclusion.
The wrestlers will therefore have to demonstrate that the alleged errors were material to the acquittal and not merely disagreements over the weight assigned to particular evidence. Singh and Tomar will have an opportunity to defend the trial court’s reasoning after notice.
Why it matters
The appeal raises the recurring question of how courts should assess delayed complaints and continued contact between a complainant and an accused in sexual-offence cases. Courts have repeatedly cautioned that there is no universal or “ideal” response to harassment and that a survivor’s conduct must be assessed within her social, professional and personal circumstances.
At the same time, criminal conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, and contradictions or conduct inconsistent with the prosecution case can be relevant where they materially affect credibility. The appellate court will have to determine whether the trial court legitimately applied that standard or allowed stereotypical expectations to displace a contextual assessment of the evidence.
The present order is only procedural. No conclusion has been reached on the grounds of appeal, and the acquittal remains in force while the appellate proceedings continue.
Court: Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh, Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi
Matter: Appeal by four women wrestlers against the August 3, 2026 acquittal of Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and Vinod Tomar
Next Date: October 9, 2026
Status: Notice issued; appeal pending. Acquittal continues to operate and the respondents remain presumed innocent.
This report concerns allegations of sexual offences. The identities of the complainants have been withheld. If you or someone you know needs support, the women’s helpline 181 and police emergency number 112 can direct you to assistance.