SC Defers Hearing on Sonam Wangchuk’s NSA Detention to January 2026

   

SRINAGAR: The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned to January 7, 2026, the hearing on a petition challenging the detention of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk under the National Security Act (NSA), Daily Excelsior reported.

Follow Us OnG-News | Whatsapp

A Bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria deferred the matter due to paucity of time. The plea has been filed by Gitanjali J Angmo, Wangchuk’s wife, who has termed the detention illegal and an arbitrary exercise of preventive powers in violation of his fundamental rights.

Earlier, on November 24, the apex court had postponed the hearing after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and the Union Territory of Ladakh, sought time to respond to a rejoinder filed by Angmo. On October 29, the court had sought replies from the Centre and the Ladakh administration on the amended petition, according to Daily Excelsior.

Wangchuk was detained under the NSA on September 26, two days after violent protests in Ladakh demanding statehood and Sixth Schedule status left multiple people dead and around 90 injured. The government has accused him of instigating the violence.

As per the amended plea, the detention order is founded on “stale FIRs, vague imputations and speculative assertions” and lacks any proximate or live link with the alleged grounds of detention, rendering it legally unsustainable. The petition argues that such use of preventive detention powers amounts to a grave abuse of authority and violates constitutional safeguards.

Angmo further submitted that the violence in Leh on September 24 could not be attributed to Wangchuk’s actions or statements, noting that he had publicly condemned the violence and reiterated his commitment to a peaceful movement.

The National Security Act (NSA) empowers the Centre, state governments to detain individuals to prevent acts considered prejudicial to national security, with a maximum detention period of 12 months, subject to earlier revocation.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here