Centre Opposes Sonam Wangchuk's Release: What Preventive Detention Rules Say

The central government informed the Supreme Court today that it does not want to release climate activist Sonam Wangchuk on health grounds as suggested by the court earlier.

Wangchuk was detained in September 2025 and is currently lodged in Jodhpur jail. Six months have passed and the central government has taken a view that the grounds of his detention still prevail, and it doesn't want to create an exception in a case like this where serious allegations are involved.

His wife, Geetanjali Angmo, has been fighting a case in the Supreme Court seeking his release.

What Indian Law Says On Preventive Detention

Preventive detention means taking a person into police custody without any trial and conviction by a court just based on suspicion. The police have the authority to hold anyone under preventive detention if they suspect them of committing a criminal offence and also to make arrests without a warrant or a magistrate's authorisation in certain cases.

As the name suggests, the purpose of a preventive detention is not to punish a person for a past offence but it is to prevent him from committing an offence in the near future.

Article 22 of the Constitution says that preventive detention of a person cannot exceed three months unless an advisory board reports sufficient cause for extended detention.

However, for cases like Wangchuk's, where the National Security Act (NSA) was invoked, the detention can go up to 12 months. This is because Clause 7 of Article 22 says that the parliament may prescribe the circumstances under which, and the class or classes of cases in which a person may be detained for a period longer than three months under any law providing for preventive detention without obtaining the opinion of an advisory board.

The parliament has from time-to-time enacted special preventive detention laws to address specific issues. These laws include COFEPOSA (1974) targeting smuggling and foreign exchange violations; PITNDPS Act (1988) addressing drug trafficking; National Security Act (1980) maintaining public order and national security, etc.

The NSA is one of the most stringent laws. The grounds for preventive detention under NSA may include threat to state security, public order, etc.

Safeguards In Law On Preventive Detention

Article 22 of the Constitution grants protection to persons who are arrested or detained. It has two parts - the first deals with cases of ordinary law and the second deals with cases of preventive detention law.

Article 22 makes it mandatory for preventive detention laws to form advisory boards consisting of persons qualified to be high court judges. Under different laws, the review boards must assess detention orders every three months to determine if there's enough reason for preventive detention.

They examine evidence, request more information if needed, listen to the person detained, and then report if the detention was justified or not. The detainee has the right to know the grounds of his/her detention.

Normally, under a simple preventive detention, the grounds are to be immediately provided, but under the NSA, the government has three weeks from the date of detention to place before the advisory board the grounds on which the order has been made and the representation, if any, made by the person affected by the order.

Legal Remedy: Article 32 And Writ Of Habeas Corpus

Habeas corpus is a writ that is enforced to protect the fundamental right to liberty of an individual against unlawful detention. This is one of the most effective remedies to get relief in preventive detention cases. Wangchuk's wife has filed a habeas corpus petition in the Supreme Court.

A writ of habeas corpus generally is a judicial order forcing law enforcement authorities to produce a prisoner they are holding, and to justify the prisoner's continued confinement.

A person can directly go to the Supreme Court seeking this writ from the court. The court then decides on a case-to-case basis and this is why the Supreme Court is hearing all the sides before arriving at a decision on Wangchuk's case.