Delhi High Court - Orders
Vijay Singh vs National Anti- Doping Agency Nada & Anr on 22 March, 2021
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
Digitally Signed By:DINESH
SINGH NAYAL
Signing Date:23.03.2021 14:28:01
$~54
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3766/2021
VIJAY SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajiv Dutta, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Yisdushpat Singh Hania, Mr.
Kamal Kant, Advocates (M:
9953326784, 9313826923).
versus
NATIONAL ANTI- DOPING AGENCY NADA &
ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 22.03.2021
1. The Petitioner in the present petition, is a sports person against whom allegations of doping have been levelled.
2. The brief background of the case is that the Petitioner had participated in the 600cc category of the JK Tyres Superbike Cup, 2018. Upon the completion of the said event, allegations of doping were raised against the Petitioner. The Petitioner was directed to report for a doping control test on 18th November 2018. On 21st January 2019, the Analytical report of the sample given by the Petitioner was detected by the National Dope Testing Laboratory to involve the presence of prohibited substances i.e., 3-OH stanozolol & 16-B-OH Stanozolol (Stanozolol metabolites), anabolic steroids. On 25th January, the Petitioner was served a notice of charge by Respondent No. 1 intimating him about the test results and directing the Petitioner to provide an explanation to the same. The Petitioner, in his reply, is stated to have disputed the said results, and requested for his Sample 'B' to W.P.(C) 3766/2021 Page 1 of 4 Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:23.03.2021 14:28:01 be tested. Thereafter, on 30th March 2019, the Petitioner is stated to have received a second notice of charge by the Respondent No. 1, stating that an analysis of Sample 'B' has confirmed the presence of prohibited substances, and as the same constituted a violation of the Anti-Doping rule, the Petitioner was liable for Disciplinary proceedings. During the pendency of the proceedings before the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Committee, the Petitioner moved a Writ Petition before the court bearing W.P.(C) No. 9135 of 2019, vide which the High Court ordered Respondent No. 1 to consider DNA Analysis to ascertain the identity of the sample.
3. On 15th January 2020, Respondent No.1 passed an order suspending the Petitioner for 4 years, from the date when the first notice of charge was issued, i.e., 25th January 2019. The Petitioner appealed the said order before the Anti- Doping Appeal Panel, wherein vide order dated 13th March 2020, the Anti- Doping Appeal panel has directed as under:
"Heard the appeal of the athlete represented by Mr. Vidushpat Singhania, Advocate for the athlete against the order passed by the Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel dated 15th January, 2020. The applicant has referred to Article 6.2 of the Anti-Doping Rules of NADA to press for his right under the Anti-Doping Rules for DNA testing. He has further submitted that he is ready to bear the entire cost of the DNA testing of the urine sample bearing sample code no. 509567.
The counsel for NADA Ms. Manpreet Kaur Bhasin submits that NADA has no objection to the same and athlete shall bear the entire direct and indirect cost of the DNA testing. In light of the above prayer made by the athlete for DNA testing is granted. It is noted that athlete's prayer 8.1 is adjourned. The matter will be listed for further hearing upon receipt of the DNA W.P.(C) 3766/2021 Page 2 of 4 Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:23.03.2021 14:28:01 testing report submitted by NADA to this Hearing Panel. Additionally, the Panel noted that this is perhaps the first case where the athlete has invoked his right under Article 6.2 of the Anti-Doping Rules of NADA to seek DNA testing of the said urine sample.
In this context, the Panel deemed it appropriate that a request may be sent to WADA to consider whether the DNA testing of urine sample itself can be done at any other WADA accredited lab. As a special case in a peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case."
4. The grievance of the Petitioner is that despite the said interim order having been passed almost a year ago, no steps have been taken by the Respondents to send the sample for testing to the World Anti-Doping Agency, which has appointed a laboratory in London for conducting the test, and has recognised the legitimacy of using DNA test for Anti-Doping purposes vide its communication dated 28th April 2020.
5. Mr. Dutta, ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submits that after the filing of this petition on 19th March 2021, the Petitioner has received an e-mail stating that necessary arrangements have been made with regard to collecting the Petitioners sample, and transportation of the same to London for analysis by WADA.
6. Issue notice to Respondent No. 1 - National Anti-Doping Agency. Let counter affidavit be filed by NADA within six weeks. Rejoinder, thereto, if any, be filed within four weeks, thereafter.
7. Considering the fact that testing of these samples in a timely manner is crucial, as sportspersons like the Petitioner are placed on a ban in the interregnum, the Respondent No. 1 - National Anti- Doping Agency ought to act with urgency while dealing with such matters.
W.P.(C) 3766/2021 Page 3 of 4Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:23.03.2021 14:28:01
8. Since the e-mail dated 19th March, 2020, clearly states that arrangements have been made for the collection of DNA samples of the Petitioner, it is directed that the Petitioner's sample shall be collected on 25th March, 2021 and the same shall be transported for testing in the designated Lab, as communicated by the WADA on or before 10th April, 2021. The requisite fee for the same is already stated to have been paid by the Petitioner and the courier services have also been engaged by the Petitioner.
9. Therefore, timely steps shall accordingly be taken by Respondent No. 1, as per the prescribed timeline fixed by this Court. The report of WADA shall also be placed before this Court before the next date
10. Copy of this order shall be e-mailed by the Petitioner to the National Anti-Doping Agency by tomorrow i.e. 23rd March, 2021, in order to enable NADA to take the requisite steps as directed in this order, along the timelines prescribed.
11. The other issues raised in this petition shall be considered by this court, once pleadings are complete.
12. List before Registrar on 14th July, 2021, for completion of pleadings.
13. List before the Court on 24th August, 2021.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J MARCH 22, 2021 MR/Ak W.P.(C) 3766/2021 Page 4 of 4