Bajrang Punia slapped with 4-year ban for violation of anti-doping code

Bajrang Punia, Tokyo Olympics bronze medalist, has been handed a four-year suspension by the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA) for refusing to provide a urine sample during the selection trials for the national team on March 10, 2024. The suspension stems from a violation of Article 10.3.1 of NADA’s Anti-Doping Rules.
NADA initially imposed a provisional suspension on April 23, 2024. Following this, the World Wrestling Governing Body (UWW) also suspended Bajrang. The wrestler successfully appealed against the provisional suspension, with NADA’s Anti-Disciplinary Doping Panel (ADDP) revoking it on May 31, 2024, pending a formal notice of charge. NADA served a formal notice on June 23, 2024. After written submissions from Bajrang and hearings held on September 20 and October 4, the ADDP ruled to enforce a four-year ineligibility period starting April 23, 2024.
The suspension also disqualifies Bajrang from competing in wrestling and potentially pursuing international coaching roles during this period. The ADDP clarified, “Needless to say that on account of the lifting of the provisional suspension for the period from 31.05.2024 to 21.06.2024 shall not be credited into the total period of ineligibility of four years.”
Bajrang argued that his refusal was not deliberate but driven by a lack of trust in NADA’s processes. He cited instances where expired testing kits were provided, claiming, “It was not an outright refusal per se. The athlete was always willing to provide his sample provided that he first received a response from NADA concerning the use of expired kits.”
Bajrang also claimed the situation was exacerbated by his involvement in protests against former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) President Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh, asserting that his treatment was prejudiced.
NADA maintained that the athlete’s actions were deliberate, stating, “The outright refusal by the athlete to provide a urine sample for the dope test was intentional and deliberate” and demonstrated disregard for anti-doping responsibilities outlined in Articles 20.1 and 20.2 of its 2021 rules.
The controversy underscores tensions between athletes and anti-doping authorities, with Bajrang’s case drawing attention to procedural and trust-related issues in sports governance.