Supreme Court Hears Case of Ladakh Activist Detained Under National Security Act

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case of Sonam Wangchuk, a Ladakh activist detained under the National Security Act. His lawyer, Kapil Sibal, argues that the detention was unlawful and violated Wangchuk's rights, citing the suppression of evidence that could support his case. The court is set to hear further arguments in January, as the legal battle unfolds amidst claims of incitement related to recent protests in Leh. This case raises significant questions about the balance between national security and individual rights.

By Narendra Chaudhary Jan 9, 2026, 12:47 IST

Legal Proceedings Surrounding Sonam Wangchuk's Detention

During a recent Supreme Court session, lawyer Kapil Sibal argued that the detention of Ladakh activist Sonam Wangchuk under the National Security Act was unlawfully enforced, as his speech advocating for peace was suppressed by the authorities.

The bench, consisting of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna Varale, was reviewing a habeas corpus petition submitted by Wangchuk’s spouse, Gitanjali Angmo. She contended that his detention was not only illegal but also infringed upon his fundamental rights.

Sibal, representing Angmo, claimed that the withholding of evidence beneficial to Wangchuk indicated malicious intent, which could invalidate the detention order.

Wangchuk was taken into custody in Leh on September 26, shortly after violent protests erupted, resulting in police firing that claimed four lives. The protests were aimed at demanding statehood for Ladakh and its inclusion in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.

On Thursday, Sibal highlighted that the detention order was based on two videos from September 10 and 11, along with two from September 24. He noted that while the grounds for detention were provided on September 29, the videos were not shared with Wangchuk, violating Article 22 of the Constitution, which ensures that individuals in preventive detention are informed of the reasons for their detention.

He further pointed out that the grounds were disclosed 28 days late, breaching the statutory timeline. Although the government claimed to have provided the necessary materials, Sibal argued that there was no evidence to support this assertion.

What was eventually given were merely links to the videos. A pen drive handed over on September 29 lacked the four videos, and while a laptop was provided on October 5, it did not rectify the issue.

Sibal informed the court that Wangchuk had consistently requested copies of the missing videos from custody, but these requests were ignored.

With the court's consent, Sibal played a video of Wangchuk's speech, where he clearly advocated for peaceful protest methods, stating, "not through violence, stones or arrows." He emphasized that the content of the speech did not threaten national security or promote violence, but rather supported national unity.

Sibal argued that if the authorities were aware of a video that showed Wangchuk advocating against violence, it should have been included in the grounds for his detention.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for January 12.

On September 24, clashes occurred in Leh, leading to police firing and violence, with demonstrators throwing stones and setting fire to a police vehicle and a local BJP office.

The government has alleged that Wangchuk's statements incited the violence.

In October, Angmo filed a petition with the Supreme Court challenging her husband's detention, arguing that the order was based on outdated and irrelevant reports that did not mention Wangchuk.