Supreme Court Directs Production Of Pendrive Given To Sonam Wangchuk In Custody, Doubts Accuracy Of Union's Transcript Of Speeches

The Supreme Court on Monday (February 16) directed the Jodhpur Jail Superintendent to produce before it in a sealed cover the pen drive given by the Union authorities to Ladakh social activist Sonam Wangchuk, while he was in detention on September 29, 2025.This was after Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, for Dr. Gitanjali Angmo, Wangchuk's wife who has challenged his detention under the National Security Act, argued that the four videos of his speeches, which were cited by the detaining authority in the detention order, were not present in the pendrive which was handed over to Wangchuk in custody. Sibal therefore argued that the detention order was vitiated due to the non-supply of the relevant materials.The Court ordered: "Heard Kapil Sibal, learned counsel. For further arguments, listed on Thursday. The learned senior counsel would submit that the pendrive furnished to detenue on 29th September, 2025, is in his custody. As such, we direct the same pen drive in his custody shall be obtained in a sealed box by the jail authorities, which shall be sealed in his presence and be forwarded to this court in a sealed box by the superintendent of jail, and Additional Advocate General, appearing for Rajasthan, shall ensure compliance with the same."A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice PB Varale was hearing Angmo's habeas corpus petition. Wangchuk was detained by the Leh District Magistrate on September 26 last year, after the Ladakh statehood protest turned violent.It may be recalled that on the last hearing, Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, for the Union, had submitted that Wangchuk was shown all the videos and contents of the detention order, and everything was videographed. He accused Wangchuk of lying to the highest Court of the country.In the last hearing, the bench had however pointed out that Wangchuk never endorsed that he had the opportunity to actually watch the videos containing his alleged inflammatory speeches.Sibal today clarified that Wangchuk was supplied the grounds of detention on September 29th, which contained the materials on which the detaining authority had relied. However, those four videos were not there in the pen drive. Consequently, Wangchuk had made several representations to the authorities asking for those videos. Sibal added that even if it is assumed that it was shown to him as was contended by the ASG, it has to be supplied as well. Sibal also submitted that apart from detaining authority relying on irrelevant material, it also relied on non-existent materials as the detaining authority was supplied with a wrong transcription of speeches. Sibal said the Respondent did not respond to these submissions that they argued.Bench questions the accuracy of the Union's transcript of speechesJustice Kumar asked if the translation of speeches given by ASG finds a place in the detention order. "Even in the tabular column you have given, this does not find a place at all...that does not find a place in the detention order. If this is the basis on which you formed your opinion order for detaining him, it should find a place. " Justice Varale particularly questioned the translation of speeches.Justice Varale orally remarked: "There should be at least the correct transcript of what he states. You may have your reasons, assuming you are supporting the order, saying that it was for the detaining authority, in what way the speech was given and whether it had the impact or effect. At least whatever he stated in the speeches, we expect the true translation. There should not be any malice or it should not be that what he said is 2-3 minutes, and your translation goes for 7 to 8 minutes, 10 minutes. Whereas, the speech is of 3 minutes, saying that I condemn this, let us stop this, perhaps we started, but as the violence is there, let us stop this. That is only 3 minutes and your translation goes to 10 minutes, then there is certainly a big variance in that."The Court has called for the actual transcription of the speeches relied on by the detention authority.What has happened so far?The Court had recently urged the Centre to review the detention in view of Wangchuk's reported deteriorating health. However, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta informed last week that that he cannot be released on medical grounds and that his health was fine.Earlier, SG Mehta had argued that Wangchuk wanted to instigate a "riot-like" situation in a place which shares a border with volatile countries and has its own regional sensitivity. He had argued that Wangchuk instigated a Nepal/Bangladesh-like Gen-Z movement. The SG highlighted that the detenu had referred to the Indian Army personnel as "them" and wanted to create a 'them v us' separation.Mehta reiterated that the safeguards provided under the NSA have been scrupulously followed. The Court has to only see if there are sufficient materials, and it does not have to go into the sufficiency of them. While reading Section 8(2) of the NSA, he said...

Supreme Court Directs Production Of Pendrive Given To Sonam Wangchuk In Custody, Doubts Accuracy Of Union's Transcript Of Speeches

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags