NEW DELHI: Gitanjali J Angmo, wife of renowned climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, 52, has told the Supreme Court in her amended application that his detention under the National Security Act (NSA) was not based on genuine concerns of public order or security, but suffers from “gross illegality and arbitrariness”.
“The detention order suffers from gross illegality and arbitrariness, as it relies upon stale, irrelevant, and extraneous FIRs. Out of the five FIRs relied upon, three pertain to the year 2024, bearing no proximate, live, or rational nexus to the detention of Wangchuk in September 2025. Moreover, four out of five of the FIRs, out of which three are registered against 'unknown persons', do not name Wangchuk. There is thus no clear, live, proximate, or intelligible connection between the FIRs and the preventive detention of Wangchuk under the NSA, 1980,” the application stated.
A two-judge bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N V Anajaria, during Wednesday’s hearing, allowed the petitioner to amend the petition and directed that the amended copy be filed within a week.
The respondents have been given 10 days thereafter to file their amended counter-affidavit. The matter has been listed for further hearing on 24 November.
Appearing for Angmo, senior advocate Kapil Sibal submitted that additional grounds have been included in the amended petition challenging the validity of the detention order.
Angmo alleged that the Centre and other respondents had violated the safeguards under Section 11(1) of the NSA. “Wangchuk has not been afforded an effective opportunity to make a representation before the Advisory Board, thereby rendering the statutory safeguard illusory. Section 11(1) of the NSA necessarily contemplates that the Detenu must not only be informed of his right of representation but must be placed in a fair position to exercise that right effectively, with access to all material relied upon by the detaining authority,” she said.
She further submitted that by allegedly denying the authorised “friend” access to the complete grounds and supporting material, the detaining authority had obstructed Wangchuk’s ability to prepare a meaningful representation. This, she claimed, frustrated the very intent of Section 11(1) of the NSA and was contrary to established law.
“The continued detention of Wangchuk should be vitiated on account of the grave and incurable procedural lapses committed by the Respondents. These lapses strike at the foundation of the constitutional and statutory safeguards embodied under the NSA, 1980,” Angmo argued.
Wangchuk, a prominent environmentalist, was arrested on 26 September under the NSA following violent protests in Ladakh over the demand for statehood and the region’s inclusion in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has accused him of allegedly inciting the violence.
The Supreme Court had on 6 October issued notices to the Centre, the Union Territory of Ladakh, and the Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur Central Jail, seeking detailed responses to Angmo’s plea challenging Wangchuk’s detention and seeking his release through a habeas corpus petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution.
According to case details, Wangchuk had been on a hunger strike since 10 September and allegedly left the protest site in an ambulance after violence broke out. He was subsequently detained under the NSA and shifted to Jodhpur Central Jail in Rajasthan.
Angmo alleged that the detention was “without cause” and questioned why she was not permitted to speak to her husband either over the phone or in person following his arrest. She also questioned the decision to invoke the NSA against him, claiming his arrest was “illegal and a violation of rules.”
Besides Angmo, the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA), which are leading the agitation for Ladakh’s statehood and inclusion in the Sixth Schedule, have also demanded the unconditional release of Wangchuk and all other detainees.
