Ladakh Violence: A Year On, Wangchuk Demands Inquiry Report, Accountability

A year after four people were killed in police firing during protests in Ladakh, climate activist Sonam Wangchuk has called for the release of the judicial inquiry report into the September 24, 2025 violence, higher compensation for the victims' families and a review of criminal cases filed against protesters. In a press release issued on September 27, Wangchuk also questioned his detention under the National Security Act (NSA) and sought wider reforms to prevent the misuse of extraordinary laws.

Wangchuk Questions Delay In Judicial Inquiry Report

Wangchuk said the government had constituted a Judicial Inquiry Commission headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice B S Chauhan to examine the events of September 24, 2025. However, nearly a year later, the findings have not been made public.

The protest violence left four people dead in police firing, while several others were injured and arrested, according to Wangchuk's statement. He asked why the inquiry had taken so long and sought clarity on who ordered the firing, whether all prescribed crowd-control measures had been exhausted before live ammunition was used, and whether the deaths could have been avoided.

Wangchuk said the questions should be answered through the judicial inquiry rather than through competing allegations.

"Let the report come. Let the people know the truth," he said, adding that if the inquiry establishes wrongdoing, those responsible should be held accountable regardless of their position.

He also criticised the compensation announced by the Ladakh Administration, which includes ₹15 lakh each for the next of kin of the four people killed and smaller amounts for those injured. Wangchuk said the amount was inadequate and called for a "respectable and dignified" compensation package for the families of those killed, as well as compensation proportionate to the suffering of those who sustained serious or lasting injuries.

The activist also referred to government commitments concerning families affected by NEET-paper leak-related cases, saying assurances of ₹1 crore compensation should not remain unfulfilled.

NSA Detention, Criminal Cases And Call For Wider Reforms

Wangchuk also revisited his own detention under the NSA on September 26, 2025, following which he was sent to Jodhpur Central Jail, around 2,000 kilometres from Ladakh. He said he remained there for nearly six months before the government revoked the detention order on March 14, 2026, while the matter was being challenged before the Supreme Court.

Questioning the basis for his detention, Wangchuk asked why he was free if he had posed such a threat to national security or public order. He said the episode raised broader questions about accountability when extraordinary powers are exercised.

"Accountability must follow the decision, not the chair," he said, arguing that officials should remain answerable for decisions taken while exercising public power even if they are subsequently transferred or promoted.

The press release also said 87 people had been identified as accused following the September 2025 events, while 81 were arrested and subjected to criminal proceedings. The Ladakh Administration has approved withdrawal of cases against 20 people, according to Wangchuk, who asked what would happen to the remaining cases.

He said those facing cases included ordinary people who happened to be at the site as well as volunteers who had attempted to calm the situation. While acknowledging that serious offences should be prosecuted where credible evidence exists, Wangchuk argued that innocent people should not remain subject to criminal proceedings.

Wangchuk concluded by linking the Ladakh episode to wider concerns over undertrial detention, criminal investigations, prosecution and the use of preventive detention laws. He called for reforms addressing wrongful deprivation of liberty, safeguards against the misuse of extraordinary laws and accountability where investigations, prosecutions or detentions are found to have been malicious, unlawful or grossly negligent.