Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court of India addressed a batch of writ petitions concerning allegations of unauthorized surveillance using Pegasus spyware on Indian citizens. The petitions, filed by individuals claiming to be direct victims and public interest litigants, arose from reports by Citizen Lab and Amnesty International in 2018-2021, which indicated that Pegasus software, produced by the NSO Group and sold only to governments, had been used to infiltrate devices of journalists, doctors, political persons, and court staff in India. The petitioners raised Orwellian concerns about privacy violations and sought an independent investigation due to the Union of India's alleged inaction and denial of the allegations in Parliament. The Union of India, through a limited affidavit, denied the allegations as based on conjectures and cited national security concerns, while indicating intent to form an expert committee. The court, convened via video conferencing, emphasized its role in upholding constitutional rights and rule of law without entering political discourse, referencing Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. It noted the serious nature of the allegations impacting fundamental rights under Article 21, including privacy and due process. During hearings, the Solicitor General expressed apprehensions about disclosing facts affecting national security, but the court clarified it did not seek sensitive information. The petitioners, represented by senior counsel like Kapil Sibal, agreed not to press for such details. The court found the Union of India's affidavit insufficient and ordered the formation of an independent expert committee to investigate the allegations thoroughly, balancing national security with the need for accountability and transparency. The decision aimed to ensure a credible process and uphold public confidence in the face of potential abuses of surveillance technology.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights - Right to Privacy and Due Process - Constitution of India, Articles 21, 32 - Petitioners alleged unauthorized surveillance using Pegasus spyware, raising concerns about privacy violations and lack of investigation by Union of India - Court emphasized duty to protect fundamental rights and ordered independent expert committee to investigate allegations, citing need to uphold constitutional aspirations and rule of law - Held that allegations of spyware use impacting privacy and freedom require credible inquiry to ensure accountability and prevent abuse (Paras 1-9). B) Constitutional Law - Judicial Review - Scope and Limitations - Constitution of India, Article 32 - Union of India filed limited affidavit denying allegations and citing national security concerns, resisting detailed disclosure - Court acknowledged national security interests but held that judicial review must balance security with rights, ordering committee without requiring sensitive information - Held that court can intervene to ensure due process and independent investigation while respecting national security boundaries (Paras 10-16). C) Criminal Procedure - Surveillance and Investigation - Independent Expert Committee - Information Technology Act, 2000, Not mentioned - Allegations involved use of Pegasus spyware by governments, with reports from Citizen Lab and Amnesty International indicating potential targets in India - Court noted Union of India's inaction and ordered formation of committee of experts to examine all aspects, aiming to dispel wrong narratives and ensure transparency - Held that independent investigation is necessary to address serious allegations of cyber-surveillance and uphold public confidence (Paras 4-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the allegations of unauthorized use of Pegasus spyware on Indian citizens warrant an independent investigation to uphold constitutional rights and rule of law, and the court's role in addressing such concerns without entering political thicket.
Final Decision
Supreme Court ordered formation of independent expert committee to investigate allegations of Pegasus spyware use, upholding constitutional rights and rule of law, while respecting national security boundaries.
Law Points
- Judicial review
- constitutional rights protection
- right to privacy
- due process
- national security
- independent investigation
- rule of law
