Supreme Court to Resume Hearing on Plea Challenging Sonam Wangchuk’s NSA Detention
The Supreme Court will continue hearing the Centre’s arguments in the case challenging the preventive detention of Ladakh activist Sonam Wangchuk under the National Security Act.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India will continue hearing the Centre’s submissions in the case challenging the preventive detention of Ladakh-based activist Sonam Wangchuk under the National Security Act (NSA).
A Bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and P B Varale is hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Wangchuk’s wife, Gitanjali Angmo, who has termed the detention illegal and violative of fundamental rights. Wangchuk has been in custody since September 26, 2025.
During the previous hearing, the court orally asked the Centre to reconsider the continuation of the detention, noting that medical reports placed before it indicated that Wangchuk’s health was not in good condition. The Bench suggested that the government “give it a thought” on whether the preventive custody should continue.
Appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj told the court that he would seek fresh instructions. He defended the detention by stating that the NSA is a preventive law intended to stop actions prejudicial to public order and national security, arguing that such detention is not punitive in nature and is based on the detaining authority’s assessment.
The ASG contended that Wangchuk’s speech on September 24, 2025, was provocative and led to violent protests in Leh, resulting in deaths and injuries. He also submitted that while the initial detention order was challenged, subsequent extensions were not separately assailed.
The Bench, however, observed that if the original detention order itself is found legally flawed—such as due to non-application of mind—later approvals would not independently validate it. The court reiterated that quashing the detention would automatically invalidate all subsequent actions linked to it.
Analysis: The case places renewed judicial scrutiny on the use of preventive detention laws against activists. With health concerns already flagged by the court, the outcome could influence how strictly authorities must justify continued detention under the NSA, especially when fundamental rights are invoked. This assessment reflects analytical opinion; all factual details above are drawn from the original content.