The Supreme Court agreed to hear on Friday, instead of Wednesday, a batch of pleas alleging the use of Israeli spyware for surveillance of certain people in India, after taking note of the submissions of the solicitor-general that he would be busy arguing a money-laundering case in another court.
As per the cause list uploaded on the website of the apex court, a bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana was scheduled to hear on Wednesday the pleas on the Pegasus issue for the first time after October 27 last year when it had ordered setting up of a three-member panel of cyber experts to probe the spying allegations. The technical probe panel has submitted an interim report in the case.
The bench, also comprising Justices A S Bopanna and Hima Kohli, was urged by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, that the proposed hearing of the pleas on Wednesday be deferred to Friday (February 25) as he would be arguing before another bench.
”The Pegasus matters are coming up before your Lordships... I am in part heard (matter) before court three in the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) vires matters. I will be on my legs tomorrow from 10.30... If it (Pegasus cases) can be kept on Friday instead of Wednesday,” said the law officer.
”All right, you please inform the other side,” said the CJI.
Mehta said he would inform the counsel for the other side who had filed the PILs.
A special bench, as per the website, had listed as many as 12 PILs, including the ones filed by the Editors Guild of India and veteran journalists N Ram and Sashi Kumar, for hearing on Wednesday and was likely to peruse and analyse the report which was to be filed by the apex court-appointed panel.
The panel, which included three experts on cyber security, digital forensics, networks and hardware, was asked to ’inquire, investigate and determine’ whether Pegasus spyware was used for snooping on citizens and their probe would be monitored by former apex court judge R V Raveendran.
The panel members were Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, Prabaharan P and Ashwin Anil Gumaste.
Justice Raveendran, who is heading the monitoring panel, has been assisted by former IPS officer Alok Joshi and Sundeep Oberoi, chairman of Sub Committee in International Organisation of Standardisation/ International Electro-Technical Commission/Joint Technical Committee in monitoring the inquiry of the technical panel.
The committee is requested to prepare the report after a thorough inquiry and place it expeditiously before the court, the bench had said.
Reports emerged recently that the probe panel has been facing difficulties as very few people were coming forward to depose before it or submit their devices for technical scrutiny.
In one of the significant verdicts in recent times over the issue of citizens' right to privacy, a bench headed by the CJI had on October 27 last year ordered setting up of the panel saying mere invocation of national security by the state cannot render the judiciary a "mute spectator" and had asserted that indiscriminate spying on individuals in a democratic country cannot be allowed.
An international media consortium had reported that over 300 verified Indian mobile phone numbers were on the list of potential targets for surveillance using Pegasus spyware.
The apex court, in its order, had said that the probe panel would be empowered to enquire and investigate what steps/actions have been taken by the Centre after reports were published in 2019 about hacking of WhatsApp accounts of Indian citizens, using the Pegasus suite of spyware, whether any Pegasus suite was acquired by the Union of India, or any state government, or any central or state agency for use against the citizens of India.
"If any governmental agency has used the Pegasus suite of spyware on the citizens of this country, under what law, rule, guideline, protocol or lawful procedure was such deployment made? If any domestic entity/ person has used the spyware on the citizens of this country, then is such a use authorised? Any other matter or aspect which may be connected, ancillary or incidental to the above terms of reference, which the Committee may deem fit and proper to investigate," the bench had said while deciding the terms of reference of the panel.
The top court had also directed the expert panel to make recommendations regarding enactment or amendment to existing law and procedures surrounding surveillance and for securing improved right to privacy, enhancing and improving the cyber security of the nation and its assets.
The other recommendations which the expert panel has been asked to submit are to ensure prevention of invasion of citizens' right to privacy, other than in accordance with law, by State and/or non-State entities through such spyware, regarding the establishment of a mechanism for citizens to raise grievances on suspicion of illegal surveillance of their devices.
