A shocking FIR from Rohtak has surfaced where a 17-year-old Indian boxer claims her female coach at the National Boxing Academy (NBA), run by the Sports Authority of India (SAI), bullied and sexually harassed her during a junior camp trip to Ireland and later at the Rohtak campus.
Allegations in the FIR: Clothes Removal, Slaps, Threats, and Insults
The minor’s parents have lodged serious and disturbing allegations in their FIR:
- The coach allegedly attempted to forcibly remove the boxer’s clothes.
- She is accused of slapping and dragging the girl.
- The coach reportedly threatened to end the boxer’s career and verbally humiliated her in front of peers, calling her of “bad character”.
- She allegedly isolated the girl during competitions and even forced her to write a false confession about using two phones.
- The continuous mental and physical strain, the FIR states, pushed the girl into deep depression.
What Do SAI and BFI Say?
SAI (Rohtak/Sonepat centre) confirms they received a complaint on April 24, 2025, citing mental and physical harassment during the Ireland camp from March 25 to April 3—without any mention of sexual harassment. They also conducted an internal inquiry involving statements from all coaches, athletes, and supporting staff. Their conclusion: no evidence was found.
BFI also conducted interviews and inspections at the Rohtak academy. They accept complaints of bullying but deny ever hearing claims of sexual harassment from the athlete or her parents. BFI’s internal findings did not justify suspending the coach.
Legal Action Taken: FIR & Sections Invoked
The minor’s parents filed the FIR at Rohtak Police, under:
- Sections 115 & 351(3) of the Indian Penal Code (intentional hurt and criminal intimidation)
- Section 10 of the POCSO Act (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) – aggravated sexual assault involving a minor.
The matter is now under police investigation, and the case remains sub judice.
Alleged Incidents Abroad and Back Home
- In Ireland, the boxer says the coach humiliated her, forced her to do painful drills, and isolated her during bouts—even refusing to allow any support coach to assist her.
- Upon return, she claims the coach followed her into her room, locked the door, and tried to molest her while demanding she remove her clothes. The coach is also accused of repeated slaps and psychological bullying, including name-calling and threats.
This conduct allegedly led to anxiety, depression, and fear of reporting due to intimidation and mental breakdown.
Contradictions: Camp Mates Deny Any Misconduct
SAI and BFI investigators say no other boxer or staff member reported witnessing any misconduct—sexual or otherwise. Camp mates reportedly denied seeing or feeling any inappropriate behaviour.
However, the boxer’s parents argue that the athlete felt isolated and scared. They allege that only later—after talking to a teammate—did they learn of the coach’s repeated misconduct.
Why This Case Matters for Indian Sports
- The alleged incidents occurred during an SAI-funded national camp in Ireland, raising questions about athlete safety even under government programs.
- The involvement of a minor athlete brings heightened responsibility under child protection laws.
- It exposes potential gaps in internal grievance redressal, even after official internal investigations.
- The allegations have sparked nationwide discussion on the need for sexual harassment training and robust reporting systems among coaches.
This controversy comes amid growing public concern about the safety and mental health of athletes in institutional environments.
What Happens Next?
- Police are investigating the FIR filed under IPC and POCSO sections. The accused coach is likely to be questioned or summoned.
- If sufficient evidence is found, her status leading the national junior camp could be suspended pending investigation.
- A thorough judicial inquiry may follow, accompanied by possible internal policy reforms at SAI to strengthen athlete protection.
Disclaimer: This report is based on FIR details, public statements, and official responses. It does not imply guilt until proven by a competent court.
