Top

Supreme Court fumes at unauthorised phone tapping

Court restrains Chhattisgarh from intercepting phones of IPS officer and his kids.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday took serious view of the Chhattisgarh government snooping on the phones of a state cadre Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Mukesh Gupta and his family members and asked how the right to privacy of a person can be violated in this manner.

Observing that “no privacy is left for anybody”, a bench of Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Indira Banerjee directed the Chhattisgarh government to file a detailed affidavit explaining who ordered the tapping of phones of the IPS officer and his family members and the justification for it.

“What is the need to do like this? No privacy is left for anybody. What is happening in this country? Can privacy of somebody be violated like this? Who ordered this?” the bench said.

The Supreme Court’s observation comes against the backdrop of the WhatsApp snooping scandal, over which the Congress and the BJP have been sparring.

The court also noted with concern that a First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against the lawyer who appeared for Mr Gupta before the top court. Staying the investigation against the lawyer arising from the FIR, the court ordered that no coercive steps would be taken against him.

The court directed the deletion of the name of Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel, who has been arrayed as one of the respondents.

The court asked senior counsel Mahesh Jethmalani, appearing for the IPS officer, not to politicise the issue by dragging the name of the chief minister.

The Supreme Court, which was unhappy over the tapping of the phones of the IPS officer, had in an earlier hearing refused to quash the FIR against Mr Gupta, including one involving the violation of FCRA by a trust running an eye hospital financed by his father.

The court by its September 2, 2019, order had stayed further investigations in the case against IPS officer Gupta.

In the last hearing of the matter on October 25, the court had ordered no further phone tapping and no coercive action against him, including harassment.

Next Story