New Delhi/ VOL News Desk/ On Thursday, environmental activist Sonam Wangchuk’s wife, Geetanjali J. Angmo, told the Supreme Court of India that her husband was not given the four videos that were made the basis of his detention.

Sonam Wangchuk has been kept in detention under the National Security Act since 26 September 2025. He was arrested after violent protests that took place in Leh.
Appearing for the wife, senior advocate Kapil Sibal informed the bench of Justice Arund Kumar and Justice Prasanna B. Varale that the authorities only showed the initial thumbnails of the videos on a pen drive, but the complete videos were never provided.

Sibal argued that the failure to supply the full videos violates Sonam Wangchuk’s constitutional right to effective defence and representation before the Advisory Board and the government.
According to Kapil Sibal, the state claims that a senior police officer brought a laptop and showed the four videos. However, when the same laptop was handed over to the detained person on 5 October 2025, those videos were not present in it.

He told the court that even if the videos were shown, it is the legal duty of the state to provide copies of the videos, and no separate application is needed for this. The relevant videos were never supplied, which has seriously affected the right to effective defence.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, sought more time to file a reply to the allegations. Kapil Sibal strongly opposed the request, saying the authorities had already failed to answer these points in their earlier reply, so no further time should be granted.
Because the arguments were not complete, the Supreme Court adjourned the hearing to 23 February.Earlier, on 18 February, the Supreme Court had raised questions on the written transcript of the videos submitted by the Centre and had observed that in the age of artificial intelligence, the accuracy and precision of translations/transcripts is extremely important.
In the next hearing, the court will examine whether the requirements of detention and full compliance with constitutional rights have been followed or not.