The Central Bureau of Investigation has initiated an inquiry into alleged financial misconduct involving prominent Ladakhi climate activist and educator Sonam Wangchuk and his associated organizations. The investigation focuses on suspected violations of foreign contribution regulations and financial discrepancies discovered across multiple entities linked to the activist.

Authorities are examining irregularities within three key organizations connected to Wangchuk: the Himalayan Institute of Alternatives, Ladakh (HIAL), the Students' Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL), and his private company Sheshyon Innovations Pvt Ltd (SIPL). The probe centers on potential breaches of financial and regulatory guidelines, particularly concerning international funding and monetary transfers.

This development coincides with heightened tensions in Ladakh, where recent clashes between police and protesters demanding full statehood resulted in four fatalities and numerous injuries. The Union home ministry attributed the violence to inflammatory statements made by Wangchuk, who had been leading a hunger strike since September 10 before calling it off following the violent incidents.

Investigations reveal that HIAL experienced a dramatic surge in donations, jumping from ₹6 crore in the 2023-24 assessment year to over ₹15 crore in 2024-25. Officials allege that four of the institute's seven bank accounts were not properly declared to authorities.

The organization reportedly received more than ₹1.5 crore in international remittances without proper Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act registration, potentially violating FCRA regulations. Additionally, investigators have flagged a substantial transfer of approximately ₹6.5 crore from HIAL to Wangchuk's private company, Sheshyon Innovations.

SECMOL, established in 1988 to reform Ladakh's educational system, allegedly operates nine bank accounts, with six remaining undisclosed to authorities. The organization is suspected of improperly depositing domestic funds into its FCRA-designated account between 2020-21 and 2022-23, which would constitute a violation of Section 17 of the FCRA.

Sheshyon Innovations, where both Wangchuk and his spouse serve as directors, experienced a significant drop in profit margins during the 2024-25 assessment year, falling to 1.14% on a turnover of ₹9.85 crore, compared to 6.13% the previous year. The company allegedly maintains three accounts, two of which were not declared to authorities.

The ₹6.5 crore transfer from HIAL to Sheshyon, including funds from international sources, has raised red flags among investigators. Officials suspect that a new account opened in 2023 may have been created specifically to absorb HIAL's surplus reserves without corresponding operational activities.

Personal financial records show that Wangchuk maintains nine individual bank accounts, with eight allegedly undeclared. Between 2018 and 2024, he reportedly received ₹1.68 crore in foreign remittances through these accounts. From 2021 to 2024, officials claim he transferred approximately ₹3.23 crore overseas, potentially raising concerns under anti-money laundering regulations.

Further violations include HIAL's receipt of ₹1.63 crore in foreign funds through an HDFC account, despite the Ministry of Home Affairs denying its FCRA registration in 2020. The organization's audited reports for 2020-21 and 2021-22 allegedly showed zero foreign earnings, contradicting actual inflows of ₹23 lakh and ₹47.6 lakh respectively.

These discrepancies could potentially constitute violations under the Companies Act (Sections 447 and 129) and Indian Penal Code Section 467.

When contacted by PTI news agency, Wangchuk acknowledged that a CBI team had visited HIAL and SECMOL the previous week, seeking information about foreign funds received between 2022 and 2024. He explained that the investigation order suggested his organizations had failed to obtain proper FCRA clearance for receiving international funds.

Wangchuk maintained that his organizations prefer independence from foreign funding but generate revenue by exporting knowledge and expertise. He claimed that in three specific instances, authorities mistakenly interpreted legitimate revenue as foreign contributions subject to FCRA regulations.