New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Center to “reconsider” the continued detention of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, whose health has deteriorated since her nearly five-month-long incarceration in Jodhpur jail and her arrest in connection with violent protests in Ladakh last year.
Climate activist Sonam Wangchuk was arrested on 26 September 2025The court’s suggestion came on a petition filed by his wife, Gitanjali Angmo, challenging his arrest on September 26, 2025, alleging that his speech on Ladakh statehood led to violence that resulted in four deaths and several injuries.
A bench of Justices Arvind Kumar and PB Bharal said, “Is there any possibility of the government’s reconsideration? The detention was ordered on September 26. It has been almost five months. His health condition is definitely not very good and there are other factors related to age.”
The Ladakh administration and the central government were represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) KM Nataraj, who said the government was equally concerned about Wangchuk’s health. As he was in the middle of his argument for the detention order, the court allowed him to take instructions on the matter and continue his submissions on Thursday. The court also called for original files containing various official communications that led to the passing of the detention order.
It was only recently that the court called for a report on the state of Wangchuk’s health in prison, which it kept under a sealed cover without revealing the contents to his wife. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared earlier this week, told the court that the detainee was “in the pink of health”, revealing for the first time on Wednesday that “the report we have seen shows that his health is not that good.”
His wife filed a petition claiming that she had developed severe stomach ailments due to untreated tap water used for drinking purposes. He requested the court for periodic monthly reports on his health and specialist care in prison. The court had last week directed the jail authorities to urgently examine him by a specialist doctor at the government facility.
ASG Nataraj told the court that Angmo’s plea should be dismissed as he had only challenged the detention order and not the subsequent orders passed by the Ladakh administration and the Advisory Board which confirmed it. According to him, the confirmation of the detention order allows the person to be kept in jail for one year, compared to a situation where the lack of confirmation by the advisory board results in the detention period ending in 15 days.
The bench told Nataraj, “If the order of detention shows legal insufficiency, can it not be set aside? The thrust of his argument is a challenge to Bhavan, the order of detention. If we accept their argument that the show-cause notice has no application of mind and is violative of the principles of natural justice, then it will be violative of the principles of state justice and all the orders will go.”
More Read
The court refused to be convinced by this submission and instead commented, “If we take your advice, we are embarking on a dangerous path. One slip and you’re in the ditch.”
Nataraj also said that the reasons for detention should be looked at in isolation and even if a foundation is made, the detention would be justified. He referred to the objection of senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Angmo, that the district magistrate’s order to detain him did not have “pleasure of mind” as it was a “copy-paste” of the recommendation made by the senior superintendent of police (SSP).
When the court sought to see the SSP’s recommendation to test the petitioner’s argument, it was not available. “We want to see the entire original file,” the bench said, as it posted the matter for further hearing on Thursday.
The petition alleged that the Center had “cherrypicked” reliable documents for ulterior purposes and denied the worker guaranteed statutory rights under the National Security Act (NSA) before being detained. It said none of the FIRs named him as an accused in the violence that began on September 24 and the only FIR accusing him was registered more than a month before his arrest.
The Ladakh administration has claimed that all these FIRs form part of a “chain of events” that can be “directly traced to the continued public incitement of the detainee” to justify his continued imprisonment.
The Union Territory administration had earlier told the court that Wangchuk was detained after the District Magistrate (DM) was “satisfied” that the activist was “indulging in activities prejudicial to state security, maintenance of public order and essential services to the community.” It stressed that “all procedural safeguards under Article 22 of the Constitution and the NSA have been faithfully and strictly adhered to.”
