The Delhi High Court rejected an interim plea to transfer activist Sonam Wangchuk from Safdarjung Hospital to a private facility on July 19, 2026 [1].
The ruling maintains government control over the activist's medical location after he was moved from a protest site. This decision highlights the tension between state security measures and the personal medical preferences of political dissidents.
Angmo Wangchuk, the wife of the activist, filed the plea seeking his transfer to Medanta Hospital. She said that her husband's health was stable and that a private facility would provide superior care [2]. In her filings, she described the current situation as an "illegal detention" [3].
Wangchuk had been on a hunger strike for 22 days [4] before authorities shifted him from the Jantar Mantar protest site to Safdarjung Hospital. The move was part of a broader effort by the government to manage the protest and ensure the activist's health was monitored.
The court dismissed the request for a transfer, saying that the government's decision to shift him from the Jantar Mantar protest site to Safdarjung Hospital was not arbitrary [5]. By upholding the government's choice of facility, the court affirmed that the state's medical arrangements were reasonable under the circumstances.
Legal representatives for the activist said they may challenge the order. The case centers on whether the government's choice of a public hospital constitutes a violation of the activist's rights or a necessary administrative action during a public protest.
“"illegal detention"”
The court's refusal to grant the transfer reinforces the government's authority to determine the location of medical care for detainees or protesters moved for health reasons. By ruling that the decision was not arbitrary, the court has set a precedent that public hospitals are sufficient for state-monitored medical care, regardless of the family's preference for private facilities.
