IPC hands three-year doping ban to Indian para-athlete Anmol Vasistha

[[{“value”:”

The International Paralympic Committee (IPC) has imposed a three-year ban on Indian Para-athlete Anmol Vasistha following a positive test for a prohibited anabolic steroid during the New Delhi World Para Athletics Grand Prix in March this year.

Vasistha tested positive for a metabolite of dehydrochloromethyl-testosterone (DHCMT) from an in-competition urine sample provided on March 11 during the men’s javelin throw F55 competition, according to an official IPC announcement. DHCMT is an anabolic androgenic steroid featured on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s 2026 Prohibited List.

The Indian field athlete was provisionally suspended on April 24 while his matter underwent resolution. Vasistha subsequently admitted to the anti-doping rule violation (ADRV) and accepted the penalties outlined by the governing body. His sanction began on April 24, 2026, and will remain in effect until April 23, 2029. 

During this period, he is banned from participating in all sporting events and organised athletic programs, except approved anti-doping educational or rehabilitation courses.

Disqualification of results and stripping of medals

As a direct consequence of the ruling, the IAAF has officially voided all performances registered by Vasistha at the New Delhi event.

“The results obtained by the athlete in the men”s javelin throw F55 competition at the New Delhi 2026 World Para Athletics Grand Prix are automatically disqualified, with all resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes.

“All other results obtained by the athlete in the New Delhi 2026 World Para Athletics Grand Prix are also disqualified, with all of the resulting consequences, including forfeiture of any medals, points and prizes,” said the IPC.

Emphasising the principle of strict liability, the IPC underscored that competitors remain fully responsible for any banned substance detected in their biological samples, regardless of whether the ingestion was deliberate, accidental, or due to negligence.

The IPC reiterated that athletes are strictly liable for prohibited substances found in their samples, irrespective of whether their use was intentional or unintentional, or whether negligence or fault was involved.

As a signatory to the World Anti-Doping Code, the IPC said it remained committed to maintaining a doping-free sporting environment for athletes.

(With inputs from PTI)

“}]]