Today, on 2nd February, In the Sonam Wangchuk’s NSA detention, the Centre told the Supreme Court that referring to the Central government as ‘them’ misleads the young generation and risks pushing impressionable minds toward destabilising, Nepal-like political narratives, dangerous paths.
NEW DELHI: The Central government and the Ladakh administration informed the Supreme Court that climate activist Sonam Wangchuk desired the Union Territory to experience agitation and violence akin to that seen in Nepal and Bangladesh.
The government alleged that Wangchuk referred to the Central government as “them,” indicating secessionist tendencies, and encouraged Gen Z (those born between 1997 and 2012) to engage in violence and civil conflict.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated before a Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale, opposing a plea challenging Wangchuk’s detention under the National Security Act (NSA),
“He (Sonam Wangchuk) refers to the Central government as ‘them.’ This ‘us’ and ‘them’ is enough for NSA detention. There is no us and them. We are all Indians,”
Mehta emphasized,
“He wants Ladakh to become Nepal or Bangladesh? This is what he clearly wants to say. We all know what happened in Bangladesh. He is targeting the impressionable youth. The moment you say ours and theirs in this country, you are doing something against the country. There is no ‘they.’ It is ‘our’ government,”
The Court was considering a plea filed by Wangchuk’s wife, Gitanjali J Angmo, against his preventive detention. Wangchuk was detained under the NSA following protests in Leh in September 2025, which demanded statehood and Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh.
During prior hearings, Angmo’s counsel argued that Wangchuk has the democratic right to criticize and protest against the government, and such expressions do not pose a security threat justifying his detention.
In response, Solicitor General Mehta asserted that Wangchuk had made inflammatory remarks and that references to Mahatma Gandhi were mere façades.
Mehta explained,
“There are instances where inflammatory speeches are made but they are covered. Beginning and end is always Gandhiji. But in the middle whatever you say, you use Gandhiji as a cover. This is done usually when inflammatory speeches are made,”
He added that the District Magistrate assessed various factors prior to issuing the detention order.
Mehta argued,
“The Court cannot question the sufficiency of the grounds of detention for subjective satisfaction. It is the district magistrate who is the judge of the situation,”
Highlighting Wangchuk’s speeches, Mehta contended that the district magistrate had to evaluate them holistically.
He stated,
“One line, one word, one sentence cannot be couched in a manner that I was preaching what Gandhiji said. This Gen Z have their own dictionary,”
Referring to a specific speech, he alleged that Wangchuk instigated hopes for riot-like scenarios similar to Nepal.
Mehta added,
“He is misleading the young generation to do what Nepal did. The illustration of Mahatma Gandhi is only a facade to hide an inflammatory speech,”
Mehta also pointed to Wangchuk’s references to the Arab Spring in his speeches.
He asserted,
“There was a bloodbath in this Arab revolution. There was self-immolation. This is what he wants the Gen Z to do. It is an invitation to indulge in civil war with bloodbath! He says why can’t we self-immolate? This is how he’s instigating impressionable youth,”
Furthermore, Mehta claimed that Wangchuk aimed to bring international attention to the Ladakh protests by threatening self-immolation.
He argued,
“‘Please suggest a suitable place for self-immolation, should it be Leh or Delhi’ – he’s putting it to the crowd! He wants to give things an international colour. Gandhiji never did this. He never threatened and instigated self-immolation! This is secessionist activity,”
Pointing out the strategic importance of Ladakh for the military supply chain, Mehta claimed that Wangchuk had made statements advocating for a referendum in the region.
Mehta said,
“He says every region has a right to decide where it belongs? That is why you hear for referendums and plebiscites. He’s giving the call that was given in Jammu and Kashmir. He says every region should be happy and go wherever they want to? Being a part of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, and sharing a border with China, when you say it is my right to decide where to join, whom I’ll associate with, plebiscite or referendum is the remedy. If this is not the case for NSA detention, then nothing is!,”
He reiterated,
“He is misleading the young generation to do what Nepal did. In the Arab revolution, there was self-immolation. This is what he wants the Gen Z to do. It is an invitation to indulge in civil war with bloodbath!”
Mehta further argued that it would have been a dereliction of duty if the district magistrate had not addressed such serious issues.
He submitted,
“A person instigating that there is an imminent war and we will not support in that, this much is enough. He cannot be allowed to spit venom any further. He says Sita ji ko bazaar mein bechne ke liye khada kiya. I won’t read any further. This is not giving an example. Mr. Sibal said this is a figure of speech. We don’t use this kind of speech for our mother!,”
The arguments in this case will continue on Tuesday afternoon.
The Ladakh Police apprehended activist Sonam Wangchuk and invoked the stringent National Security Act (NSA) just two days after the Union Territory experienced some of its worst violence in decades.
This unrest was triggered by protests demanding statehood and Sixth Schedule protections, which escalated into violent clashes.
Earlier, the Union home ministry revoked the license of his NGO under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010, citing alleged violations. The MHA linked the mob violence and arson that occurred to “provocative” speeches made by Wangchuk, who referenced Arab Spring-style protests and the Gen Z movements in Nepal.
Wangchuk, however, contended that the government is fabricating a case to imprison him.
The alleged violations include depositing locally generated funds into SECMOL’s FCRA account, diverting funds for non-permissible activities such as studying the nation’s sovereignty, and failing to deposit foreign funds into the designated FCRA account.
The protests in Ladakh resulted in four fatalities and over 80 injuries, including among police personnel, on Wednesday. A curfew was imposed in Leh, vehicles were set on fire, and security forces resorted to firing tear gas and live rounds to disperse the crowds.
Climate activist Sonam Wangchuk, who was on a hunger strike advocating for statehood and constitutional protections, terminated his fast as tensions escalated after two fellow hunger strikers collapsed and required hospitalization.
This turmoil occurred just days before scheduled talks between the Centre and the Leh Apex Body on October 6, which would be the first in four months. Sources from the Centre indicated that the government wanted Wangchuk excluded from the discussions, viewing him as an impediment.
Case Title : Dr Gitanjali J. Angmo v. Union of India and others, Diary No. 56964/2025
Read Live Coverage