New Delhi, Oct 6 (UNI) The Supreme Court today issued notice to the Central government on a habeas corpus petition filed by Gitanjali Angmo, wife of Ladakh-based environmentalist, innovator and activist Sonam Wangchuk, challenging his detention under the National Security Act (NSA).
A Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria sought the Centre’s response after a brief hearing.
Appearing for Angmo, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal submitted that the plea assails the preventive detention, stating, “We are against the detention.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central government, informed the Court that the grounds of detention had been duly supplied to Wangchuk. “Grounds for detention were supplied,” he said.
Taking note of the submissions, the Bench ordered, “Issue notice.”
Wangchuk was arrested in Ladakh on September 26 and is currently lodged in Jodhpur Central Jail. His arrest followed protests and incidents of violence in Ladakh over the demand for statehood for the union Territory.
In her plea, Angmo contended that her husband’s detention under Section 3(2) of the NSA was illegal and arbitrary, and not genuinely connected to concerns of national security or public order.
Instead, she argued, it was intended to silence a respected reformer advocating for democratic and ecological causes.
The petition further stated that Wangchuk’s activities were limited to peaceful Gandhian protests in Ladakh, an exercise of his constitutional rights under Article 19. His detention, therefore, amounted to a violation of free speech, it said.
Angmo also alleged that procedural safeguards for preventive detention were not followed, thereby violating Wangchuk’s right to liberty and equality under Articles 21 and 14 of the Constitution.
It was further pointed out that neither Wangchuk nor his wife had been served with a copy of the detention order or the grounds for it.
The petition also challenged the transfer of Wangchuk to Jodhpur, more than a thousand kilometres away from Ladakh.
Angmo has sought his immediate release, production before the Court, permission for telephonic and in-person access, and directions to ensure he is provided with medicines, clothes, food, and other basic necessities while in custody.
