Arab Spring claim ‘false’, Sonam Wangchuk tells Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday directed that climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, currently under detention in Jodhpur Central Jail, be medically examined by a specialist doctor after he complained of stomach-related issues allegedly caused by contaminated drinking water in prison.

A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and P.B. Varale ordered jail authorities to arrange a medical examination by a specialist from a government hospital, such as a gastroenterologist, and to place Wangchuk’s medical report before the court in a sealed cover by Monday, 2 February. The court recorded that while routine examinations may have been conducted, the circumstances warranted assessment by a specialist.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Wangchuk’s wife Gitanjali J. Angmo, informed the court that an application had been filed seeking urgent directions to the jail authorities for immediate medical attention.

“He has problems in his stomach because of the water. He has been wanting a doctor to check. But nobody comes. Let him have a weekly check. And let him have the water we provide,” Sibal submitted.

Counsel appearing for the Rajasthan government, however, told the court that Wangchuk had already been examined by the jail doctor 21 times in the past four months. Additional solicitor-general K.M. Nataraj placed on record Wangchuk’s medical reports, stating that between 26 September 2025 and 26 January this year, the activist had undergone 21 medical examinations.

Nataraj told the court that the latest medical report indicated Wangchuk’s blood pressure was normal and the clinical examination of the chest and abdomen was “clean”. He added that Wangchuk had been advised Vitamin B12 supplements and there was nothing alarming in his most recent report.

The bench nevertheless observed that, given the nature of the complaint, Wangchuk should be examined by a specialist doctor. The apex court recorded Nataraj’s statement that Wangchuk would be examined by a specialist from a government hospital and that a report would be submitted in a sealed cover by Monday.

The medical directions were issued in the course of an ongoing hearing on Angmo’s petition challenging Wangchuk’s detention under the National Security Act (NSA). Wangchuk (59) has been lodged in Jodhpur Central Jail since 26 September last year, 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.

Earlier in the day, Sibal strongly contested the charges against Wangchuk, including the claim that he had threatened to overthrow the government “like the Arab Spring”. Appearing before the same bench, Sibal argued that the police had relied on selectively edited video clips to mislead the detaining authority.

“Look at the video. What he says (according to the police) is if the government of India will not give statehood, he will overthrow the government like the Arab Spring. He does not say so. I will give the transcription (of the video),” Sibal told the bench.

'Arab Spring' refers to a wave of anti-government protests, uprisings and armed rebellions that spread across parts of the Middle East and North Africa beginning around 2010.

Sibal also refuted allegations that Wangchuk had suggested that the people of Ladakh would not assist the Indian Army during a war if the government failed to help the region. “False, that is the problem with this case. They have misled the detaining authority. I have a link to the video itself where he is praising the government and the prime minister; the video makes specific reference to peaceful protest...

“Somebody told him (Wangchuk) Kargil wants to merge with Kashmir. He said, ‘Fine, if they want to join, they can join.’ There’s nothing relating to a plebiscite,” Sibal said.

Addressing another allegation, Sibal denied that Wangchuk had made derogatory remarks against Hindu gods, claiming that the statement had been falsely projected by certain IT cell accounts.

“The unedited version brings out the complete picture. It was meant to say that after liberating Ladakh from Kashmir, the central government failed to extend its promise of constitutional safeguards under the Sixth Schedule (of the Constitution). He says like Ram got Sita out of the clutches of Ravan and left her in the market, a similar thing the central government did with Ladakh.

“He just made this allegorical statement on Ram. If these are statements on the basis of which one is detained, then we might as well stop speaking. His wife is a practising Hindu,” Sibal said.

The senior advocate further emphasised that Ladakh is an ecologically fragile and pristine region and that Wangchuk’s activism has consistently focused on environmental protection. “A lot of investments of different kinds are coming in now. The same thing happened in Uttarakhand. There is the Aravalli matter now. We must protest. There’s nothing wrong with that. If Ladakh is to remain pristine, we don’t want any kind of activity that destroys the environment,” Sibal submitted.

Angmo, in her petition, has contended that the tenor of a speech delivered by her husband at Leh was not to propagate violence but to quell it, and that facts had been manipulated to portray him as a criminal. She has also argued that Wangchuk was not provided with the “complete grounds” of his detention and was denied a proper opportunity to make a representation against the detention order.

The plea claims that the detention is illegal and an arbitrary exercise of power, violating Wangchuk’s fundamental rights. According to the amended petition, the detention order is founded on “stale FIRs, vague imputations and speculative assertions”, lacks any “live or proximate connection” to the stated grounds of detention, and is therefore devoid of legal or factual justification.

“Such arbitrary exercise of preventive power amounts to gross abuse of authority, striking at the core of constitutional liberties and due process, rendering the detention order liable to be vitiated by this court,” the plea states.

Angmo has also said it is “wholly preposterous” that Wangchuk — recognised for over three decades at state, national and international levels for his contributions to grassroots education, innovation and environmental conservation — would suddenly be targeted in this manner. She has maintained that the violence in Leh on 24 September 2025 cannot be attributed to Wangchuk in any way, noting that he himself condemned the violence on social media and said it would lead to the failure of Ladakh’s “tapasya” and its peaceful pursuit over the past five years, calling it the saddest day of his life.

The Supreme Court had earlier deferred the matter on 24 November last year after solicitor-general Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre and the Union Territory of Ladakh, sought time to respond to Angmo’s rejoinder. On 29 October, the court had sought responses from the Centre and the Ladakh administration on Angmo’s amended plea.

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 period of detention under the law is 12 months, though it can be revoked earlier.

The hearing on the legality of Wangchuk’s detention remains inconclusive and will continue on 2 February, even as the court has foregrounded his immediate medical examination while he remains in custody.

With PTI inputs