Sonam Wangchuk Was Instigating Nepal-Like Gen-Z Protest, Gandhian References Just Facade : Centre To Supreme Court

The Union Government today argued that Ladakh social activist Sonam Wangchuk instigated the younger generation of Ladakhis to get inspired by Gen-Z movements in neighbouring countries of Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka if the demand of the Sixth Schedule is denied to Ladakh. Wangchuk was detained under the National Security Act on September 26, 2025, after the Ladakh protest for statehood turned violent.The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice PB Varale continued hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Wangchuk's wife Dr Gitangli Angmo. Angmo has challenged Wangchuk's detention under the National Security Act, 1980, as illegal. At the outset, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta(for the Union) submitted that Wangchuk's speech, in which he refers to Gandhian principles here and there, is deliberate to cover its inflammatory contents, where he is seen to have instigated the younger generation towards protests, including violent methods including self-immolation.Before addressing this point, Mehta first clarified that the judicial review of the Court is very limited. It can't go into the question of whether the detention was justified or not, but whether the procedure was followed so that the detainee is not unfairly treated. Mehta referred to certain judgments on this aspect. Adding to this, Mehta pointed out that there are certain inbuilt safeguards under the NSA. For instance, the District Magistrate's authority of detention has to be confirmed by the State Government. The detenue has a right to make a detailed representation before the Advisory Board headed by a former judge of the High Court. Mehta submitted that the detenue has neither challenged the State's order confirming his detention nor the order of the Advisory Board.He said that it is factually incorrect and an "afterthought" for Wangchuk to argue that the four videos were not supplied to him when the service of the detention order took four hours, as the DIG Ladakh had gone to meet him and showed each page of the order, which was videographed. "When the order of detention was served upon the detenue, the service took about four hours. The DIG Ladakh goes to him, sits with him and shows each page [of the detention order], which is videographed. He shows him all the videoclip that you are satisfied and he says, yes I am satisfied...if necessary, I am ready to produce that," Mehta averred.When Justice Kumar remarked that the petitioner had argued that the detention order was based on borrowed material, Mehta answered that this argument is inherently fallacious. He said that the authority making the detention order can't be physically present everywhere and each time, and therefore, he has to rely on materials placed before him to arrive at a subjective satisfaction."You insulate the inflammatory part with the first part relating to non-violence, etc and the last part to non-violence and Gandhi ji, etc. What the District Magistrate is supposed to see is taking the speech in its holistic manner, whether one line, one word, one sentence or two paragraphs, maybe vouched in a manner that ultimately he may tell your lordships he was preaching what Gandhi ji preached but is it enough or not," Mehta said.Wangchuk was hoping for a riot-like situationReading the speeches by Wangchuk, Mehta argued that he was hoping for a Nepal-like Gen-Z protest in a place that shares a border with volatile countries. He even instigated the young to take inspiration from the Arab Spring, where governments of six countries were overthrown through violent protests. Mehta remarked: "...please mark this here. You are not addressing Gen-Z in isolation. You are anticipating or hoping for a riot-like situation in Nepal. It is a clear instigation otherwise, what is the relevance of Nepal and Ladakh? He is misleading the young generation to do what Nepalis did in their country...There is something very serious which mylords should see. What Mahatma Gandhi was doing was against another imperial government. Not instigating people to resort to violence against its own government. Comparison with Mahatma Gandhi is fallacious and only a facade to hide the completely inflammatory and instigatory speech."He was referring to the participation of the younger population in the Ladakh protests. Adding to this, Mehta argued that Wangchuk had said that the arrival of large number armed personnel in Ladakh is unfortunate. "This is where the concern for security and public order comes for the District Magistrate...Security forces are 'they', and we are 'he'. That is the distance he is trying to make between the people and the security forces of our country.""Efforts, desire and his wish is to make Nepal an example for Gen-Z...You may use Mahatma Gandhi as a shield in the beginning and in the end. But ultimately, you are saying what I want is Nepal like situation, Bangladesh like situation considering the fact that this is a border state, a very senstive border," Mehta...

Sonam Wangchuk Was Instigating Nepal-Like Gen-Z Protest, Gandhian References Just Facade : Centre To Supreme Court

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags