<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court </a>was on Thursday told that the grounds of detention of activist <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/sonam-wangchuk">Sonam Wangchuk </a>were supplied to him after a flagrant delay of 28 days, in clear violation of the statutory timeline.</p><p>Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of Ladakh-based activist, also claimed, his speech appealing for peace was illegally suppressed from the detaining authority.</p>.Supreme Court adjourns to January 7 hearing on wife's plea challenging Sonam Wangchuk's detention.<p>"Wangchuk could be clearly heard stating in English that the movement would not be through violence, stones or arrows, but through peaceful means. It can even be cleanly seen and heard in the video," the counsel submitted before a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale.</p><p>Sibal claimed he did not threaten the security of the State, nor did he propagated violence, and indicate any intent to continue prejudicial activities.</p>.Sonam Wangchuk's HIAL doing exemplary work, should be given UGC recognition: Parliamentary panel.<p>The counsel maintained, his speech was not at all in any manner can be seen as "threatening the security of the state."</p><p>He also submitted the detention order of September 26, 2025, was founded primarily on four videos relied upon by the detaining authority. The videos were of September 10, September 11, and two videos of September 24. However, while the grounds of detention were supplied on September 29, the four videos were not furnished to the detenue.</p><p>Sibal said, as per the detention law, if the detaining authority was aware of a certain fact that is central to what happened on September 24, which was a video relied upon to show that he was propagating violence, then in centrality it must also include a video which in fact states through Wangchuk's words that he was against violence. </p><p>"Hiding that fact from the detaining authority will also suggest a kind of malice which would in fact would be another ground for declaring the order to be vitiated on grounds of malice," the counsel said.</p><p>During the hearing, certain videos of Wangchuk's was played in the courtroom.</p><p>The court fixed the matter for further hearing on January 12.</p><p>Gitanjali J Angmo, wife of Wangchuk, filed the writ petition, alleging that the detention was illegal, in violation of his fundamental rights and in breach safeguards under Section 11(1) of the National Security Act.</p><p>The activist was arrested on September 26, 2025 in the wake of the violent protests, which claimed lives of four people left scores others as injured in Ladakh over the demand for statehood for the region.</p><p>Wangchuk has been kept in Jodhpur central jail in Rajasthan.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court </a>was on Thursday told that the grounds of detention of activist <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/sonam-wangchuk">Sonam Wangchuk </a>were supplied to him after a flagrant delay of 28 days, in clear violation of the statutory timeline.</p><p>Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of Ladakh-based activist, also claimed, his speech appealing for peace was illegally suppressed from the detaining authority.</p>.Supreme Court adjourns to January 7 hearing on wife's plea challenging Sonam Wangchuk's detention.<p>"Wangchuk could be clearly heard stating in English that the movement would not be through violence, stones or arrows, but through peaceful means. It can even be cleanly seen and heard in the video," the counsel submitted before a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale.</p><p>Sibal claimed he did not threaten the security of the State, nor did he propagated violence, and indicate any intent to continue prejudicial activities.</p>.Sonam Wangchuk's HIAL doing exemplary work, should be given UGC recognition: Parliamentary panel.<p>The counsel maintained, his speech was not at all in any manner can be seen as "threatening the security of the state."</p><p>He also submitted the detention order of September 26, 2025, was founded primarily on four videos relied upon by the detaining authority. The videos were of September 10, September 11, and two videos of September 24. However, while the grounds of detention were supplied on September 29, the four videos were not furnished to the detenue.</p><p>Sibal said, as per the detention law, if the detaining authority was aware of a certain fact that is central to what happened on September 24, which was a video relied upon to show that he was propagating violence, then in centrality it must also include a video which in fact states through Wangchuk's words that he was against violence. </p><p>"Hiding that fact from the detaining authority will also suggest a kind of malice which would in fact would be another ground for declaring the order to be vitiated on grounds of malice," the counsel said.</p><p>During the hearing, certain videos of Wangchuk's was played in the courtroom.</p><p>The court fixed the matter for further hearing on January 12.</p><p>Gitanjali J Angmo, wife of Wangchuk, filed the writ petition, alleging that the detention was illegal, in violation of his fundamental rights and in breach safeguards under Section 11(1) of the National Security Act.</p><p>The activist was arrested on September 26, 2025 in the wake of the violent protests, which claimed lives of four people left scores others as injured in Ladakh over the demand for statehood for the region.</p><p>Wangchuk has been kept in Jodhpur central jail in Rajasthan.</p>
