The Delhi High Court on July 19, 2026, rejected a petition seeking the release of activist Sonam Wangchuk from Safdarjung Hospital in New Delhi, where he was forcibly taken the previous day after more than three weeks on hunger strike. Justice Mini Pushkarna declined to order Wangchuk's immediate discharge and scheduled the next hearing for Friday, July 24, 2026. The petition, filed as a Public Interest Litigation (case number 9498/2026) by Wangchuk's wife Gitanjali Angmo, also sought his transfer to a private hospital.

Wangchuk, 59, was seized by police on July 18, 2026, at Jantar Mantar, the designated protest site in central New Delhi, where he had been on hunger strike since June 28 in solidarity with the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest movement. Dozens of officers removed him from the site and took him to the state-run Safdarjung Hospital.

The CJP movement emerged in May 2026 after Chief Justice of India Surya Kant likened some unemployed young people to "cockroaches" during a court remark. The movement's central demand is the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. The protests have gained traction against the backdrop of a corruption scandal in India's national examination system: over 2.2 million aspiring doctors were forced to retake the medical entrance exam after the original May 2026 test was voided due to leaked questions.

Justice Pushkarna stated that doctors had administered only oral fluids and supplements with Wangchuk's consent and that his bodily autonomy was not being violated. The court also said that no force was used in shifting him to Safdarjung Hospital and that Indian authorities were right to move him because he had not admitted himself to hospital voluntarily.

Angmo stated on the social platform X that the hospital refused to discharge Wangchuk or allow his transfer to a private facility. She reported that approximately 30 police personnel were stationed on their floor, with over 100 across the hospital. Safdarjung Hospital reported that Wangchuk's vitals were stable but his blood parameters remained "marginally altered," requiring sustained medical intervention and round-the-clock monitoring.

Wangchuk had described the planned July 20 Parliament march as "India's second freedom movement." The march, organized by the CJP movement, is intended to escalate pressure on the government over the examination scandal and the broader issues of youth unemployment and institutional accountability.

The Delhi High Court had earlier directed daily medical monitoring of Wangchuk but had not itself ordered that he be shifted to the hospital. That decision was made by authorities who determined his prolonged hunger strike, now in its fourth week, warranted medical intervention.

The broader context here is one of escalating tension between the Indian state and a protest movement that has drawn in prominent public figures like Wangchuk, whose hunger strike at Jantar Mantar lent visibility to the CJP cause. The court's ruling effectively keeps Wangchuk in state custody at a government hospital during the lead-up to the July 20 Parliament march, raising questions about the state's authority to compel medical treatment of a protester who has not consented to hospitalization. Justice Pushkarna's finding that bodily autonomy was not violated hinges on the distinction between oral fluids and supplements administered with consent and more invasive interventions, such as forced feeding via nasogastric tube. Should Wangchuk's condition deteriorate, that distinction may be tested.

The case also sits at the intersection of two politically charged issues: a judiciary already under scrutiny after the Chief Justice's remarks that birthed the CJP movement, and an examination corruption scandal that has directly affected millions of aspirants. The July 24 hearing will provide the next legal checkpoint, but the July 20 march may shape the public and political trajectory of the movement well before the court reconvenes.