NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Monday a plea filed by Gitanjali J Angmo, the wife of jailed climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, challenging his detention under the National Security Act (NSA).
A two-judge Bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Prashant B Varale, is slated to hear Angmo’s plea on February 2.
Wangchuk was detained under the NSA and lodged at Jodhpur Central Jail in Rajasthan following protests in Leh in September 2025 over demands for statehood and Sixth Schedule status for the Union Territory of Ladakh.
During the previous hearing on January 29, Wangchuk, through counsel, denied allegations that he had made statements calling for the overthrow of the government along the lines of the Arab Spring.
He told the top court that he has a democratic right to criticise and protest against the government and that such expressions do not threaten the security of the state so as to warrant preventive detention.
These submissions were made by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Angmo. Sibal told the court that there was no case of violence against Wangchuk.
“Whatever he has done is purely in a peaceful manner. No violence, only through peaceful means,” he said.
The apex court directed that Wangchuk be examined by a specialist after he complained of stomach issues allegedly caused by contaminated water.
Claiming innocence, Sibal added that Wangchuk has always praised the government and the Prime Minister’s work. He argued that the allegation that Wangchuk advocated a plebiscite was wrong.
The senior lawyer also pointed out that the agency had alleged that Wangchuk instigated people at the border, which he said was completely baseless.
He submitted that Wangchuk has always followed a peaceful path of “anshan and padyatras” (hunger strikes and marches), in the tradition shown by Gandhiji.
“There’s the padyatras and anshans. These are not violent acts. The ground of detention has to be on proactive acts of violence attributed to me,” Sibal argued.
Alleging that several statements cited against Wangchuk had been misattributed, misquoted or taken out of context, Sibal questioned the detention order as illegal and arbitrary.
He said a detaining authority relying on a statement must consider the entire statement and not a sentence or two.
“The whole detention order is based on excerpts, out of context, misleading, false, thereby suggesting a selective approach, malafide in nature,” he said.
Referring to a video, the senior advocate said it had been wrongly alleged that Wangchuk stated that he would overthrow the government if Ladakh was not granted statehood.
The apex court was hearing the plea filed by Angmo challenging Wangchuk’s preventive detention.