Ladakh withdraws cases against 10 more people booked in 2025 Leh violence

Withdrawing a criminal case means the authorities stop pursuing that case through the criminal justice process. It can remove the need for further prosecution, although the exact legal effect depends on the formal closure or withdrawal procedure. In this instance, the decision concerns 10 people booked after violence in Leh on September 24 last year.

The Ladakh administration approved the withdrawals after the Ladakh Police recommended them. Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena said the decision would give the individuals a positive path forward for their careers and lives. He also said it placed justice, healing, and recovery ahead of prolonged litigation.

This is part of a wider amnesty effort. The administration had earlier announced withdrawal of cases against 20 of the 87 people booked. It also said closure reports would be filed in cases against 25 people. The withdrawals address a major demand from representatives seeking special protections for Ladakh.

The investigation began with 87 people identified as accused in rioting cases connected with the Leh violence. Of those, 81 were arrested, and criminal proceedings began against them. Ladakh Chief Secretary Ashish Kundra said nine people had been chargesheeted, meaning the administration said there was evidence of their involvement.

The 10 cases now withdrawn are not a separate incident. They belong to this larger group of 87 people booked after the September 24 violence. The administration had previously announced withdrawal of criminal cases against 20 of the 87 people. It had also said closure reports would be filed in cases involving 25 people.

These figures show that the cases are being handled individually or in groups. The Lieutenant Governor’s office directed the Ladakh Director General of Police to review the remaining investigations. The latest decision therefore expands the administration’s amnesty effort without ending every case connected with the violence.

For the 10 individuals, withdrawal can mean the administration no longer continues the criminal cases against them through the ordinary process. That may reduce court-related burdens and uncertainty. Lieutenant Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena specifically connected the decision with their careers and lives, saying recovery should take priority over prolonged litigation.

The decision also has a wider political purpose. Withdrawal of cases has been a key demand from representatives negotiating special protections for Ladakh. The administration presented the move as a way to foster unity, healing, social harmony, and lasting peace after the September 24 violence.

The effect is not universal. The administration previously said nine people had been chargesheeted because there was evidence of involvement. It also directed the Ladakh Police to review other investigations. Thus, the 10 withdrawals may build trust in talks, while unresolved cases and the continuing review will shape how far reconciliation proceeds.

On September 24 last year, a protest in Leh demanding statehood and protections under the Sixth Schedule turned violent. Police opened fire, killing four protesters and injuring 44 others. The deaths and injuries led to criminal cases against people identified as accused in the resulting rioting.

The protest was connected to broader demands about Ladakh’s political future and safeguards. Representatives from the Kargil Democratic Alliance and the Leh Apex Body later negotiated with officials from the Ministry of Home Affairs. Withdrawal of cases became a central demand in those discussions, linking the legal response to the wider political dispute.

The administration later announced compensation for victims. On September 13, it sanctioned Rs 15 lakh for the next of kin of each person killed. It approved Rs 3 lakh for people with major injuries and Rs 1 lakh for minor injuries. The case withdrawals are another official response to the violence.

Statehood is generally sought because it gives a region a stronger elected government and greater control over laws, administration, and public policy. For people in Ladakh, the demand reflects concern about how the region is governed and represented. The article identifies statehood as one of the main demands behind the Leh protest.

The Sixth Schedule is a constitutional framework designed to protect certain tribal areas through autonomous councils. It can provide local institutions with powers over subjects such as land, resources, customs, and community affairs. The article does not detail the specific safeguards sought in Ladakh, but it identifies Sixth Schedule protection as another central demand.

These demands matter politically because they seek stronger guarantees for local decision-making and community interests. They also shape negotiations between the Kargil Democratic Alliance, the Leh Apex Body, and the Ministry of Home Affairs. The case withdrawals form part of the administration’s response during those negotiations.

Several bodies have different roles in the decision. The Ladakh Police reviewed cases and recommended withdrawing the 10 cases. The Lieutenant Governor-led Ladakh administration then approved the recommendation. Vinai Kumar Saxena announced the decision and explained its purpose as promoting healing, unity, and peace.

The Director General of Police also has a review role. The Lieutenant Governor’s office directed the Ladakh DGP to examine cases involving people still under investigation. The Chief Secretary, Ashish Kundra, provided figures about arrests, chargesheets, and evidence. He also described the administration’s plan to file closure reports in some cases.

The Kargil Democratic Alliance and Leh Apex Body represent regional demands in talks with the Ministry of Home Affairs. They met MHA officials in Leh before the administration first announced withdrawals in August. Their demand for ending cases is part of negotiations over special protections for Ladakh, while police and administrative officials handle the individual case review.

The National Security Act, or NSA, is an Indian law that permits preventive detention. Preventive detention means holding a person to prevent anticipated threats identified by authorities, rather than punishing a person after conviction in an ordinary criminal trial. The detained person may not be facing the same prosecution process as someone charged with a conventional offence.

An ordinary criminal case normally involves allegations, investigation, a chargesheet where applicable, and a court process that can result in conviction or acquittal. NSA detention is an executive detention mechanism. It can operate without waiting for a criminal conviction, although the detention remains subject to statutory safeguards and review procedures. These distinctions are general legal context; the article does not explain the Act’s procedures.

After the Leh protests, climate activist Sonam Wangchuk was booked under the NSA and lodged in Jodhpur jail for six months. The article discusses that detention separately from the 87 rioting cases and does not say whether it was withdrawn.