Sonam Wangchuk Detention Hearing Updates: Wangchuk denies allegations to ‘overthrow government through Arab spring’

Sonam Wangchuk was detained under the National Security Act, 1980, which empowers the Centre and states to detain individuals to prevent them from acting in a manner “prejudicial to the defence of India, relations with foreign powers, the security of India, or the maintenance of public order or essential supplies”.

District Magistrates and Police Commissioners can also exercise these powers when authorised. Unlike an arrest under criminal law, NSA detention is preventive, not punitive and is designed to prevent an individual from committing an act deemed harmful.

The matter has been posted for further hearing on Monday.

Bench: The learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an application seeking direction to the jail authorities to ensure immediate medical examination of detenu by qualified doctor; to direct appropriate test including test relating to his stomach ailment, conduct necessary treatment be provided without delay; and to direct jail authorities to furnish medical reports concerning the detenue's health condition.

Bench: Place before this court the report after medical examination

Sibal: Constant trouble with his stomach

Bench asks for the medical report

Opposing counsel: Medically examined 21 times. It’s not like there is any lack of medical care

Sibal: I have only request to excuse my presence

Bench: Virtual presence is as good as physical presence

Sibal refers to the relevant portion in his submissions

Sibal: Where am I saying that Ladakhis will not help Indian Army? There is no such thing.

Sibal reads allegations of Wangchuk calling for self-immolation, and denies any such statement.

Sibal: Political agitation will go on in any part of the country. When there was roadblocks in Delhi riots, there was no detention order. There is prosecution, that’s a different matter.

Sibal: The proposition of law is that if there is a chain of evidence and cumulation of material which ultimately leads to detention order then they will not be treated as grounds of detention

Sibal: Detention may apply to proactive acts which threaten the security of the state.

Sibal now refers to judgments discussing SAFEMA, COFEPOSA and NSA laws.

Sibal refers to point of law in the matter — Section 5A of NSA

5A- Grounds of detention severable.—Where a person has been detained in pursuance of an order

of detention [whether made before or after the commencement of the National Security (Second

Amendment) Act, 1984 (60 of 1984)] under section 3 which has been made on two or more grounds, such

order of detention shall be deemed to have been made separately on each of such grounds and

accordingly—

(a) such order shall not be deemed to be invalid or inoperative merely because one or some of the

grounds is or are—

(i) vague,

(ii) non-existent,

(iii) not relevant,

(iv) not connected or not proximately connected with such person, or

(v) invalid for any other reason whatsoever,

and it is not, therefore, possible to hold that the Government or officer making such order would have

been satisfied as provided in section 3 with reference to the remaining ground or grounds and made

the order of detention;

Sibal refers to the portion relied upon by the detaining authority on the allegation to “overthrow the government through Arab spring”

Sibal: I have not said it.

Sibal: The concerns that Ladakhi have (reads the statements of Wangchuk).

Sibal: We have a pen drive which shows a video of June 8 2025. We will read the transcript

Sibal: Democracy is about criticising the government. Part of that is marches, protests, peaceful demonstrations. Has any action been taken under CrPC for disturbing public order? None.

Sibal: I have given response to annexure B (video) they have relied upon. It is not his (Wangchuk) statement at all. It’s a comedian’s statement.

Sibal: Right from 2024 till date I have never been blamed for violence or made a statement that i will instigate violence

Sibal: We went for a walk from Ladakh to Delhi. There was no blocking of road. It was a peaceful demonstration. It was in media. It happened one year earlier.

Sibal questions the allegations with regards to the statement and says statement made on March 19 2024 becomes ground of detention order. "Is this fair?", he asks.

Bench: According to the detention order what is the derogatory remarks you said against Hindu gods

Sibal: On the face of it what is set out in the grounds of detention is completely inconsistent. If the facts are not placed before the detaining authority what will the detaining authority do, copy paste and sign the order

Sibal referring to the allegations says where is the question of a plebiscite?

Sibal refers to a link where Wangchuk is praising the government and the PM.

Sibal: Video is of March 17, 2024 which is a year and five months before the detention order is passed.

Sibal: When I say I will follow the Gandhian path, when I end the anshan ( hunger strike) where is question of saying all this?

Bench refers to a media interview: He says “if demands he will not help the Army during wartime.” Thereby posing threat to national security.

Sibal: This is false

Sibal refers to a video uploaded on 8.6.2025.

Sibal: Detaining authority has relied upon videos of detenue portions of which have been selectively extracted so as to mislead the detaining authority to arrive at its objective satisfaction.

Sibal: The two FIRs in which the detenue has been mentioned fail to establish the rational nexus with the detention order

Bench: You can ask your colleague to read

Sibal: But I wont get the flow of the matter. Its very kind of you

Sibal is reading through the written submissions

Sibal: I have prepared written submissions.

Sibal begins reading written submissions

Sibal informs he is having viral

A bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Prasanna B Varale will hear the case today.