Detaining authority didn't apply mind, relied on irrelevant material: Sonam Wangchuk's wife to SC
New Delhi (PTI): Jailed climate activist Sonam Wangchuk's wife, Gitanjali J Angmo, told the Supreme Court on Monday that the detaining authority had not not applied his mind and relied on irrelevant material while detaining her husband.
She told the court that four videos relied upon by the detaining authority have not been furnished to Wangchuk, which is a violation of his right to effective representation.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing in the court for Angmo, told a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale that not supplying the videos violated Wangchuk's right to effective representation before the Advisory Board as well as the government.
Sibal further argued that the district magistrate did not apply his mind while recommending Wangchuk's detention and only "copy-pasted" the recommendations made by the senior superintendent of police (SSP), Ladakh.
"Grounds of detention are simply a copy-paste of the recommendation. The material relied upon should have a proximate link to the detention order. Irrelevant things were relied upon for detention," Sibal said.
The hearing in the matter remained inconclusive and will continue on January 13.
ALSO READ: SC delivers split verdict on Section 17A of PC Act mandating sanction to probe govt servants
Angmo had earlier submitted that the tenor of a speech delivered by her husband at Leh was not to propagate violence, but to quell it, and that facts are being manipulated to portray him as a criminal.
Angmo had also told the court that Wangchuk was not provided with the "complete grounds" of his detention and not given a proper opportunity to make a representation to the authority concerned against the action.
Wangchuk was detained under the stringent National Security Act (NSA) on September 26, 2025, two days after violent protests demanding statehood and Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh left four people dead and 90 injured in the Union Territory.
The government has accused Wangchuk of inciting the violence.
The NSA empowers the Centre and states to detain individuals to prevent them from acting in a manner "prejudicial to the defence of India". The maximum detention period is 12 months, though it can be revoked earlier.
The Leh district magistrate (DM) had earlier told the apex court that Wangchuk indulged in activities prejudicial to the security of the State, maintenance of public order and essential services, which led to his detention under the NSA.
In an affidavit filed before the court, the DM had denied that Wangchuk was detained illegally or was being treated improperly under detention, and submitted that the grounds of his detention were communicated to him.
Angmo, in her plea, has said the unfortunate events of violence in Leh on September 24 last year cannot be attributed to Wangchuk's actions or statements in any manner.
Wangchuk himself condemned the violence through his social media handles and categorically stated that it would lead to the failure of Ladakh's "tapasya" and peaceful pursuit of five years, Angmo said, adding that it was the saddest day of his life.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC refuses to entertain PIL seeking removal of Savarkar portraits, warns of costs
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a PIL seeking the removal of portraits of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar from Parliament and other public spaces, warning the petitioner of exemplary costs before allowing the plea to be withdrawn.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi cautioned the petitioner, retired Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer B Balamurugan, against filing what it described as a frivolous petition and indicated that heavy costs could be imposed for wasting the court’s time.
"This kind of frivolous petition… shows the mindset," the CJI said.
The bench was irked by the petitioner's submission that he could not come to argue the case in person because of financial constraints.
ALSO READ: Centre asks Blinkit, Zepto, Swiggy to stop 10-minute delivery claims: sources
"You were in the IRS. You can afford to come to Delhi and show yourself and argue. We would like to impose exemplary costs on you. What do you think of yourself?” the CJI said.
Balamurugan, in his PIL (public interest litigation), sought directions for the removal of portraits of the historical figure from the Central Hall of Parliament and other public spaces.
Additionally, the plea sought a direction to restrain the government from honouring individuals chargesheeted for heinous crimes such as assassination or anti-national activities unless they are acquitted.
During the hearing, the CJI questioned the petitioner’s background and service record, including his last posting before retirement and the circumstances under which he was denied promotions.
Asked whether he faced corruption charges, Balamurugan replied in the negative, stating instead that he had faced departmental action after undertaking a hunger strike in 2009 for “peace in Sri Lanka”.
Calling the petition an abuse of the judicial process, the bench asked the petitioner whether he wished to proceed or withdraw the case.
“Please don’t indulge in all this. Enjoy your retirement now. Have some constructive role in society,” the CJI remarked.
Sensing the outcome, Balamurugan sought permission to withdraw the petition, which was granted.
