.webp)
The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the Central Government on a petition filed by Gitanjali Angmo, wife of Ladakh-based social activist and education reformer Sonam Wangchuk, challenging his detention under the National Security Act (NSA), 1980. The petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, is a habeas corpus plea seeking her husband’s release. She has argued that the detention is illegal under Article 22, since neither she nor Wangchuk were given the grounds of his arrest. The plea has named the Union Government, Ladakh Administration and the Superintendent of Jodhpur Central Jail where Wangchuk is currently lodged as respondents.
Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the grounds of detention must be served to her. However, Solicitor General(SG), Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, countered that the grounds had already been provided to the detenu himself and that the law does not require the same to be given to the wife.
When Sibal sought interim relief, Justice Kumar observed, “At this stage, we will not say anything.” The bench, however, asked the SG why the grounds could not also be given to Angmo, to which Mehta reiterated there was “no legal mandate” for such disclosure, adding that the petitioner was attempting to create a new basis for challenge. Sibal maintained that without access to the detention grounds, the order could not be effectively contested. He clarified that he was not raising a new ground of challenge but only seeking documents necessary to mount a legal defence. The SG agreed to examine the feasibility of sharing the grounds with her.
On the issue of medical care, Sibal sought interim relief, saying Wangchuk required medical support. The SG responded that doctors had already examined the activist, who had denied taking any medication. Nevertheless, Mehta assured the court that if medical supplies were needed, they would be provided.
Another plea by Sibal, to allow petitioner to meet Sonam Wanghchuk was turned down at this stage. Justice Kumar pointed out that no formal request for a meeting had been made to the authorities. “First make a request, and if it is rejected, then approach the Court,” the judge said.
SG also said that, the petitioner was trying to create a "hype" and an "emotive issue" that the detenu was denied medical relief and meetings with his wife. "This is all just to portray in the media and in that region that he is deprived of medicines and access to wife. Just to create an emotive atmosphere. That's all," SG said.
Justice Kumar also asked why the petitioners had not approached the High Court. Sibal responded that since the detention order was passed by the Centre, the question of jurisdiction remained unclear. The bench asked him to clarify this point at the next hearing.
However. the bench of Justice Arvind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria listed the matter for further hearing on October 14.
