Sonam Wangchuk’s wife seeks to amend petition; SC defers to October 29 hearing on plea for his immediate release

The Supreme Court on Wednesday deferred hearing on Gitanjali Angmo’s petition seeking her husband activist Sonam Wangchuk’s immediate release from detention under the National Security Act (NSA), 1980 to October 29 after she sought time to amend her petition to add certain additional grounds and reliefs.

On behalf Angmo, senior advocate Kapil Sibal told a Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria that the petitioner wanted to amend her petition to add certain additional grounds and reliefs.

Sibl said the petitioner will file an application to amend the petition and that Wangchuk should be allowed to exchange some notes with his wife.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said he had no objection to the detainee sharing notes with his wife. Wangchuk had already been given a laptop as desired by him to prepare notes on the grounds of the challenge, he said.

Mehta, however, said the delay in providing the grounds of detention to the wife should not become a ground to challenge the detention.

“I am not objecting to notes (shared with his wife)... The only caveat is… delay of two days in making representation is a valid ground for challenging detention… Please clarify that this will not be used as a ground…There are attempts to create grounds of challenge (to the detention,” the Solicitor General said.

However, the Bench—which had on October 6 issued notices to the Centre, Ladakh administration and others on Angmo’s petition seeking Wangchuk’s immediate release—posted the matter for hearing on October 29, without expressing any opinion on the issue.

The Bench took note of an affidavit filed by the Jail Superintendent of Central Jail, Jodhpur which stated that Wangchuk’s elder brother and his lawyer met him earlier this month.

In an affidavit filed in the top court, the Ladakh Administration on Tuesday defended Wangchuk’s detention under the NSA), saying he “had been indulging in activities prejudicial to the security of the State”.

Responding to Angmo’s petition seeking his immediate release from detention, Leh Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate Romil Singh Donk – who passed the September 26 detention order under the NSA – denied as “baseless” her allegation that her husband had been detained illegally and was being ill-treated during the detention.

The affidavit asserted that Wangchuk had been “lawfully detained under a lawful authority” after considering relevant material under Section 3(2) of the NSA.

“I was satisfied and continue to be satisfied with the detention of the detenue,” Donk asserted.

The activist was detained on September 26 under Section 3(2) of the NSA, two days after protests demanding Ladakh’s statehood and the Sixth Schedule status turned violent, leaving four persons dead and nearly 100 injured.

Terming the allegation of not being informed of the detention order as “completely false and misleading”, the affidavit said that the detenue was categorically informed about his arrest under the NSA and his transfer to Central Jail, Jodhpur, Rajasthan and that his wife was also immediately informed about it.

The Leh District Magistrate said Wangchuk was communicated the grounds of his detention on September 29 and his signature was taken on the receiving copy.

The affidavit stated that Wangchuk has been medically examined five times between September 26 and October 9, 2025 and “he was certified to be medically and physically fit” and that he has told the authorities that “he is not on any medication.”

It said notwithstanding the fact that nearly a fortnight has elapsed since he was detained, “no representation has been made by Sh. Sonam Wangchuk to the detaining authority against his detention.”

In a separate affidavit Jodhpur Central Jail Superintendent Pradeep Lakhawat told the top court that Wangchuk was not in solitary confinement and that he has been kept in a 20 feet x 20 feet Standard Barrack. He medically examined on October 12 as well and was found to be fit, he said.

Terming the detention “illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional”, Angmo had contended that the detention order violated her husband’s fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 (right to equality), 19 (right to various freedoms), 21 (right to life and liberty) and 22 (Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases) of the Constitution.