The Supreme Court on Monday questioned the Central government over the transcripts of videos cited against Ladakhi activist Sonam Wangchuk in his detention order under the National Security Act (NSA). The Court said it wants actual transcripts of Wangchuk's statements from the government after senior advocate Kapil Sibal submitted that some of the words attributed to the activist were never said by him.
A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale was hearing the plea moved by Wangchuk's wife Gitanjali J Angmo against his detention. The Court said, "The tabular list you have filed, some of these things don’t even find a place in the detention order. There should be at least the correct transcript of what he (Wangchuk) says! There should not be a variance. If the speech is of three minutes and your transcription goes on for 7-8 minutes, there is certainly malice in that." When the Court asked for actual transcripts from the government, Sibal said,"This is not something which is a surprise to them. I had stated all this earlier. They never responded. Why should we give them another chance? We can rely on what they have given to your lordships."
On a lighter note, the Court referred to an Urdu couplet, "In a lighter vein, there’s this couplet 'humne wo bhi suna jo unhone kaha hi nahi' (we even heard what they never said)."
”In response, Sibal said,"Yes. Aur jo hum keh rahe hai unhone suna hi nahi (and what we are saying, they didn't listen to at all)." The Court then said,"'Hum sun rahe hai na' (we are listening, aren't we?)." Sibal responded positively."That’s why we are here," he said. Sibal urged the Court to consider Wangchuk's statements in the proper context.
Wangchuk was detained under the NSA following protests in Leh in September 2025 over demands of statehood and Sixth Schedule status for the Union Territory of Ladakh. His wife then filed a Habeas Corpus petition seeking his release.The government concluded its arguments in the case last week. On Monday, Angmo's counsel made arguments in rejoinder.
Sibal also argued that Wangchuk's right to representation against the detention was violated as the content cited against him was not provided to him on time. After Sibal said copies of only four of the eight videos were actually provided to Wangchuk, the Court said the pen drive given to him be submitted in a sealed cover before the next date of hearing. The matter will be heard next on February 19.
Follow us
