Ladakh climate activist Sonam Wangchuk's wife, Gitanjali Angmo, has moved the Supreme Court challenging his detention.
The writ petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, was filed on October 2. Angmo, through the habeas corpus petition, seeks the release of her husband, who has been reportedly lodged in a jail in Rajasthan’s Jodhpur after he was detained following the violent clashes in Ladakh.
"I have sought relief from the Supreme Court of India through a HABEAS CORPUS petition against Wangchuk's detention. It is one week today. Still I have no information about Sonam Wangchuk's health, the condition he is in nor the grounds of detention," she said in a social media post.
Why was Sonam Wangchuk detained?
Wangchuk, a Magsaysay Award winner, was detained on September 26 under the National Security Act in the wake of the violent protests in Leh that left four people dead and more than 50 others injured.
The protests, organised to demand Sixth Schedule status and statehood for Ladakh, turned violent September 24 when demonstrators clashed with security forces. In the aftermath, Wangchuk ended his planned 35-day hunger strike on 15th day.
The Ladakh union Territory Administration had criticised Wangchuk for his recent actions and provocative statements, which were made despite the government having announced a date for dialogue with Ladakh leaders on September 20, 2025.
The government specifically cited statements made by Wangchuk from the protest venue and during an interview on September 11, 2025. He was accused of referencing events in Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh to incite the public and youth. The government quoted him as saying the youth "do not want peace and Mahatma Gandhi's path is not necessary."
The administration noted that prior to the hunger strike, Wangchuk advised participants to wear masks, caps, and hoodies, citing COVID-19, despite no sign of an outbreak in Ladakh. In earlier remarks on his YouTube channel ‘Achoe Nyingstam’, he allegedly called for an "Arab Spring"-style revolution in India and encouraged self-immolation as a form of protest, citing events in Tibet and Tunisia.
The administration further alleged that when the situation escalated, other leaders attempted to pacify the crowd, while Wangchuk did not intervene and left the site discreetly. His continuation of the hunger strike, even after the government offered flexibility on talk dates, was described as politically motivated and responsible for subsequent disturbances.
When will SC hear the petition?
It is expected that the matter might be moved for an urgent hearing once the Supreme Court re-opens on October 6, after Dussehra holidays.
