Supreme Court asks Centre to review Wangchuk’s detention
NEW DELHI: Observing that the medical condition of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, who has been in detention for more than four months, is not very good, Supreme Court asked the Centre Wednesday to rethink/relook its decision to continue to keep him in custody, reports Amit Anand Choudhary.SC had earlier directed authorities to conduct Wangchuk’s medical examination by a specialised doctor and file a report before it. The activist is currently lodged in Jodhpur jail. The medical report was placed before the apex court during the last hearing.Wangchuk was detained on Sept 26 last year under the National Security Act following protests in Leh over demands of statehood and Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh. SC is hearing the plea moved by Wangchuk’s wife Gitanjali Angmo against his preventive detention.SC asks govt to produce original files on Wangchuk’s detentionApart from submissions, counter submissions and law points, just give a thought to it, as an officer of the court. The detention order was passed on Sept 26, 2025, nearly five months have passed. Considering the health condition of the detainee… which is certainly not very good. There are certain age-related, may be otherwise. Is there a possibility for the govt to rethink, have a relook?” the bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and P B Varale asked.Additional solicitor general K M Natraj told the bench he will take instruction and will brief the court on the next date of hearing.The bench also directed the govt to place before it original files related to Wangchuk’s detention and the process adopted by the govt. Nataraj submitted that the govt had nothing to hide, and will place the documents.The additional solicitor general submitted that the speech given by Sonam Wangchuk on Sept 24 last year was so provocative that it eventually led to the violent protest, which claimed the lives of four people. “Four people died in the incident, and 161 were injured. I will place the materials. Ultimately, it was his provocative speech, his instigation, which led to violence. The person needs not to be actively participating in it. It is the propensity of the person to influence the group of people or to commit somebody else to do a violent act which is relevant. That is more than sufficient for prevention detention,” he submitted. “It (NSA) is only a preventive law. It is only to prevent somebody from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or security of the state. Preventive detention is not punitive detention. It has to be necessarily left to the discretion of the executing authority. It is purely discretionary,” he said.Earlier, the govt had told the court that the activist was trying to create political and social turmoil and unrest in Ladakh, and was making an attempt to emulate what happened in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal.
