Pegasus case: Supreme Court asks petitioners to give a copy of the petition to Center, big points of hearing
The Supreme Court has heard petitions seeking an investigation into Israel’s Pegasus software espionage case today. It has been said on behalf of the petitioners that there has been espionage from journalists, politicians to judges in the country, so there is a need for an independent investigation. On which the Supreme Court said that the reports about Pegasus which have come in the media, in which claims of espionage have been made. If there is truth in that then it is definitely a serious issue. The Supreme Court has asked all the petitioners to give a copy of the petition to the Centre. Now the next hearing on this matter will be on Tuesday.
The petition has been filed on behalf of advocate ML Sharma, Rajya Sabha MP John Brittas, journalists N Ram and Shashi Kumar, Jagdeep Chokkar, Narendra Mishra, and journalist Rupesh Kumar Singh, seeking a probe into the Pegasus case. Pegasus, a bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana, is hearing these petitions.
Kapil Sibal, appearing for N Ram in the Supreme Court, called the matter serious and urged the court to issue a notice to the central government. He said that we all want you to issue notice to the central government.
Senior advocate Arvind Duttar, appearing for the petitioner journalists, submitted that the privacy of citizens as a whole and individual privacy has to be considered. Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for petitioner educationist Jagdeep, told the Supreme Court that the magnitude of the present case is huge and please consider an independent inquiry into the matter.
The Supreme Court, after hearing the counsel for the petitioners, said that if the report is true then there is no doubt that the allegations are serious. The Supreme Court asked all the petitioners to give a copy of their petition to the Centre.
Hearing the matter, Chief Justice Ramanna said the Pegasus issue came to the fore in 2019 and no one had made any serious attempt to collect verifiable material about espionage. Most of the PILs are based on newspaper cuttings of national and international media. We cannot say that there is absolutely no material in this case or that there is nothing in the arguments.
The CJI said that some of those who filed the petition claimed that their phones had been hacked. You are well versed in the provisions of the IT and Telegraphic Act. It seems that they did not make any effort to file a complaint.