Supreme Court asks Centre for explanation on Wangchuk detention
The Supreme Court of India on October 6, 2025, issued a notice to the Central Government in response to a writ petition filed by Gitanjali Angmo, wife of Ladakh-based social.
The detention comes in the wake of recent violent clashes in Ladakh, which authorities claim necessitated Wangchuk’s arrest under national security provisions. However, Angmo’s petition raises serious questions about the legality of the detention, highlighting the absence of official grounds for his arrest.
A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria noted the seriousness of the matter and scheduled the hearing for next Tuesday, October 14, 2025. The court’s notice directs the Central Government to respond to the petition before the hearing, signaling judicial scrutiny over the invocation of the NSA in this case.
The petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, takes the form of a habeas corpus plea, seeking the immediate release of Wangchuk, who is reportedly lodged in a Jodhpur Central Jail. According to the petition, the detention is being challenged as illegal under Article 22, since neither Wangchuk nor his wife has been provided with the legal grounds for his arrest — a key requirement under the law.
In her petition, Angmo has named multiple respondents: the Union Government of India, the Ladakh Administration, and the Superintendent of Jodhpur Central Jail. She argues that her husband’s prolonged detention without disclosure of charges or evidence infringes upon constitutional protections guaranteed to every citizen.
Wangchuk, widely known for his work in education reform and sustainable development in Ladakh, has previously drawn attention both nationally and internationally for his innovative approaches to addressing climate, water, and educational challenges in the region. His detention has sparked concern among civil society groups, legal experts, and human rights organizations, who have emphasized the importance of due process and transparency, particularly when preventive detention laws are invoked.
Legal analysts note that the case highlights broader questions surrounding the use of the National Security Act, which allows authorities to detain individuals without formal charges for extended periods if deemed a threat to national security. “While the law exists to maintain safety, it must also be balanced with fundamental rights,” said a senior advocate familiar with the matter. “Judicial oversight is critical to prevent misuse.”
The case has also drawn widespread public attention, with citizens and activists expressing concern over the lack of clarity regarding the detention. Social media platforms have become a space for discussions about civil liberties, governance, and the rights of individuals under preventive detention laws.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the matter on October 14, the nation watches closely, emphasizing the delicate balance between national security and individual freedoms. Wangchuk’s wife, Gitanjali Angmo, has stressed that her goal is to ensure transparency and accountability in the legal process and to secure the release of her husband until proper grounds for his detention are presented.
The unfolding proceedings are expected to set an important precedent for how preventive detention cases under the NSA are scrutinized by the highest court, particularly in cases involving prominent activists and citizens engaged in public service.