Sonam Wangchuk not given videos relied upon for detention: Wife

Sonam Wangchuk was detained under the stringent NSA on September 26, two days after violent protests demanding statehood and Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh left four people dead and 90 injured in the Union territory. (File photo)

LADAKH ACTIVIST Sonam Wangchuk’s wife Gitanjali Angmo Thursday told the Supreme Court that the September 26, 2025 order detaining him under the National Security Act (NSA) was “vitiated” as the videos based on which it came to be issued were not supplied to them.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for Angmo told a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria that the detaining authorities had relied on four videos while issuing the detention order. Though the grounds of detention were supplied on September 29, the four videos were not supplied, he pointed out. The hearing will continue on January 12.

The senior counsel said the law is well settled that if the grounds of detention are supplied but the documents relied upon in the grounds are not supplied, it will be against Article 22 (protection against arbitrary arrest and detention) of the Constitution.

He pointed out that what the authorities did was they supplied the grounds of detention with the links to the videos. They also gave a laptop on October 5 but it didn’t matter as the pendrive they gave on September 29 did not have the four videos. Sibal said Wangchuk had written to the authorities multiple times seeking the missing videos and Angmo had asked them for copies of these letters, but they were not provided to her.

Referring to SC judgments, which upheld the rights of the detenu, he said the detenu has the right to be furnished with the grounds of detentions, along with the documents so referred, and that failure or delay in furnishing the same would amount to denial of the right to make an effective representation.

Sibal said there has been a time gap between the supply of the documents and the meeting of the advisory board, which means that the detenu has the constitutional right to be given that space of time so as to make an effective representation. He added that if the documents are supplied one day before the advisory board, it is a violation of the law because the concept is that the detenu should have enough time. The senior counsel pointed out that Wangchuk was, in fact, saddened by the violence and exhorted the protestors to stop it. “On September 11, I went on hunger strike. On the 15th day of my hunger strike, there were incidents of violence with which I was very disturbed. I made a speech breaking my hunger strike. I said I cannot accept this violence… and I am appealing to you to stop this violence,” Sibal submitted.

The senior counsel said though the authorities had the video of this speech, they did not rely on it. Playing the video in the courtroom, Sibal said the tenor of his address was not in any sense threatening the security of the state or that he will continue such activities or propagate violence, but to quell it.

He added that its tenor “is consistent with our national integrity and unity, which is, in fact, just the opposite of what the detention order says”.