Off the field troubles continue to find Hockey India. On Monday, April 20, the Delhi High Court found Hockey India and its Secretary General Bhola Nath Singh guilty of contempt of court for wilfully disobeying a judicial direction. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav delivered the judgment in CONT.CAS(C) 1119/2025. The court will hear sentencing arguments on May 4, 2026. The court has also given Bhola Nath Singh the opportunity to purge the contempt by taking corrective steps before that date.
This ruling is the latest in a growing list of legal troubles for the federation. A search of the Delhi High Court’s case records shows nine cases filed against Hockey India in 2025 alone, spanning contempt petitions, writ petitions, and appeals. Courts have disposed of three cases. Six remain pending.
The Case: How It Started
Syeed Asima Ali filed the case, who claims to be the elected Vice President of Hockey India. She approached the Delhi High Court alleging violations of the National Sports Development Code of India, 2011, and challenged the eligibility of Bhola Nath Singh to hold office as Secretary General, citing tenure and age restrictions under the Sports Code.
Along with the main writ petition W.P.(C) 613/2025, Ali sought interim relief. On January 17, 2025, Justice Sachin Datta passed an interim order in CM APPL. 2825/2025, directing Hockey India to provide Ali with access links to attend all executive board meetings in her capacity as elected Vice President. The direction was clear and unconditional. Hockey India agreed to it in court.
“After some hearing, it is agreed that the requisite link shall be provided to the petitioner to enable her to participate in all Executive Board Meetings that may be held.” — Order dated January 17, 2025, W.P.(C) 613/2025, Delhi High Court
The Violation: Two Meetings, No Links
Hockey India complied with the order for meetings held up to April 29, 2025. However, Ali was not provided with links for two executive board meetings held on July 4, 2025 and July 27, 2025. This led to the filing of the contempt petition CONT.CAS(C) 1119/2025 on July 21, 2025.
Hockey India’s defence was that Ali’s parent club, Young Khalsa Sports Club Srinagar, had been disaffiliated from Hockey Jammu and Kashmir, and that Hockey J&K had communicated on July 3, 2025 that Ali would no longer be recognised as their representative. Hockey India argued this meant she had ceased to be eligible to attend executive board meetings.
The court rejected this defence entirely. It held that the January 2025 order contained no such qualification or condition. It was a clear, unconditional direction. If Hockey India believed subsequent developments warranted a change, the correct course was to file a modification application with the court. No such application was filed before the meetings of July 4 and July 27.
“The directions are clear, unambiguous, and not susceptible to the kind of mischief the respondents are seeking to engage in.” — Judgment dated April 20, 2026, CONT.CAS(C) 1119/2025, Delhi High Court
The Timing That Raised Questions
The court went further than simply finding non-compliance. It raised serious questions about the timing of events. The notice for Hockey India’s 113th Executive Board Meeting, sent by Bhola Nath Singh on June 26, 2025 at 10:56 PM, included as Agenda Item 14 a discussion on resolutions passed by Hockey J&K regarding Ali’s representation. However, Hockey J&K’s communications regarding her de-recognition were dated June 27 and July 3, 2025, after the meeting notice was sent.
“It is difficult to comprehend how, without some degree of collusion, the agenda for Hockey India’s Executive Board Meeting could include discussion on the developments in Hockey J&K, even before they were communicated.” — Judgment dated April 20, 2026, CONT.CAS(C) 1119/2025, Delhi High Court
The court noted that Bhola Nath Singh gave no specific reply when confronted with this discrepancy in open court.
The Apology Rejected
BBhola Nath Singh filed an affidavit on March 30, 2026 tendering an unconditional apology, approximately 250 days after the contempt petition was filed. The court rejected it, finding the apology procedurally defective, Singh having filed it only after the court directed him to appear personally, and seeing no genuine remorse in his conduct.
“An unconditional apology, unlike the holy water from the Ganges, cannot purify the respondents, specifically Mr. Bhola Nath Singh, of his conscious, concerted, deliberate and wilful disobedience of the court’s directions.” — Judgment dated April 20, 2026, CONT.CAS(C) 1119/2025, Delhi High Court
Held in Contempt: What the Court Decided
The court found Hockey India and Bhola Nath Singh guilty of civil contempt. It made clear that a National Sports Federation operating under state oversight and receiving public funding cannot ignore judicial directions.
“Mr. Bhola Nath Singh, the General Secretary of Hockey India, is administering a National Sports Federation, an authority that functions under the aegis of, and receives funds from, the State. For such an authority, non-compliance of the orders of the Court, is no less than an administrative sin.” — Judgment dated April 20, 2026, CONT.CAS(C) 1119/2025, Delhi High Court
What Comes Next
The court will hear sentencing on May 4, 2026. Singh has the opportunity to purge the contempt by taking corrective steps before that date
Separately, the main writ petition W.P.(C) 613/2025, which challenges Bhola Nath Singh’s eligibility to hold office as Secretary General under the Sports Code, remains pending before the Delhi High Court. The court has not yet decided that case.
Read More: Manpreet Singh Returns in Hockey India’s 36-Member World Cup Camp
Get Indian Hockey news and opinion directly to your inbox, subscribe to our Substack
Case references: CONT.CAS(C) 1119/2025 — Syeed Asima Ali vs Hockey India & Ors., judgment dated April 20, 2026. W.P.(C) 613/2025 — Syeed Asima Ali vs Hockey India & Ors., interim order dated January 17, 2025. Both orders are available on the Delhi High Court website at delhihighcourt.nic.in.
This article is based entirely on primary court documents. GiveMeHockey has not added any editorial characterisation beyond what is stated in the judgments.
