A speech by Ladakh-based activist Sonam Wangchuk calling for peace was illegally suppressed from the detaining authority under the National Security Act, lawyer Kapil Sibal told the Supreme Court on Thursday, according to Live Law.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna Varale was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Wangchuk’s wife Gitanjali Angmo, who argued that his detention under the National Security Act was illegal and violated his fundamental rights.
Appearing for Angmo, Sibal argued that the suppression of material favourable to the detainee indicated “malice”, which constituted grounds to invalidate the detention order, Live Law reported.
Wangchuk was arrested in Leh on September 26 under the National Security Act, two days after four persons were killed in police firing during protests seeking statehood for Ladakh and its inclusion in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. He was later taken to a jail in Rajasthan’s Jodhpur
On Thursday, Sibal argued that the detention order was founded primarily on two videos from September 10 and September 11 and two from September 24. While the grounds of detention were supplied on September 29, the four videos relied upon were not furnished to Wangchuk, which, according to Sibal, violated Article 22 of the Constitution, Live Law reported.
Article 22 of the Constitution guarantees the right of a person in preventive detention to be informed of the grounds of detention.
Sibal further submitted that the grounds of detention were supplied after a delay of 28 days, in clear breach of the statutory timeline.
He added that although the Centre claimed the material had been supplied, there was no proof to substantiate this claim.
What was eventually provided, he argued, were only links to the videos. A pen drive given on September 29 did not contain the four videos, and although a laptop was provided on October 5, this “did not cure the defect”, Live Law reported.
Sibal also informed the court that Wangchuk had repeatedly written from custody pointing out that the videos were missing and requesting copies, but they were never furnished.
With the court’s permission, Sibal then played a video of this speech in open court and highlighted that the activist could be clearly heard stating that the movement should be through peaceful means and “not through violence, stones or arrows,” Live Law reported.
Sibal told the court that the tenor of the speech was not one that threatened national security or propagated violence, but one was consistent with national unity and integrity.
“According to detention law, if the detaining authority is aware of a certain fact that is central to what happened on [September 24], which is a video relied upon to show that I am propagating violence, then in centrality it must also include a video which in fact states through Wangchuk’s words that he was against violence,” Live Law quoted Sibal as submitting before the court.
The court has listed the matter for further hearing on January 12.
On September 24, police firing and violence broke out in Leh. Demonstrators clashed with and threw stones at the police, and set fire to the Bharatiya Janata Party office and a police vehicle.
The Union government has claimed that the violence was incited by Wangchuk’s “provocative statements”.
In October, Angmo filed a petition before the Supreme Court challenging his detention. She has contended that the order relied on “stale, irrelevant, and extraneous” first information reports, many of which did not name Wangchuk.
Also read: Nine false claims about Sonam Wangchuk – and why they fall flat
You’ve read Scroll.
Now help sustain it
Scroll is funded by readers, not corporate owners. If you believe our work matters, support our newsroom. Become a member today!
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!