Supreme Court asks Center to review Wangchuck’s detention | India News

New Delhi: A look at the health of climate activists sorryI have been detained for more than four months and my situation is not good. Supreme Court Amit Anand Chaudhry reported that the Center on Wednesday was asked to reconsider/reconsider its decision to continue detaining him.The SC had earlier directed the authorities to conduct a medical examination of Wangchuk by professional doctors and submit a report to him. The activist is currently lodged in Jodhpur jail. The medical report was submitted to the Supreme Court during the last hearing.Wangchuck was detained under the National Security Act on September 26 last year after protesting in Leh over Ladakh’s demands for statehood and Sixth Schedule status. The SC is hearing Wangchuck’s wife Gitanjali Angmo’s plea against his preventive detention.SC asks government to provide original documents on Wangchuck’s detentionBeyond arguments, rebuttals, and legal arguments, as a court official, think about this. The detention order was passed on September 26, 2025, nearly five months ago. Considering the detainee’s health…that’s certainly not good. There is a certain age correlation, and there may be other situations. Is it possible for the government to rethink and reexamine? asked Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale.Additional Solicitor General KM Natraj told the bench that he would take instructions and would brief the court on the next date of hearing.The judge also directed the government to submit to it the original documents related to Wangchuck’s detention and the procedures taken by the government. Nataraje said the government had nothing to hide and would place the documents.The Deputy Attorney General pointed out that Sonam Wangchuk’s speech on September 24 last year was extremely provocative and eventually led to violent protests that resulted in the death of four people. “Four people died and 161 were injured in the incident. I will put the materials away. In the end, it was his provocative remarks and his incitement that led to the violence.” The person does not need to be actively involved. It is a person’s tendency to influence a group of people or prompt others to commit related acts of violence. This is more than adequate for preventive detention. ” he said. “It (NSA) is only a preventive law. It is only to prevent someone from compromising in any way the maintenance of public order or national security. Preventive detention is not punitive detention. It has to be at the discretion of the executing authority. It is purely discretionary,” he said.Earlier, the government told the court that the activist was trying to create political and social unrest and unrest in Ladakh and was trying to emulate what happened in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal.