National

'No Privacy Left For Anybody', SC Says In Chattisgarh Govt Phone Tapping Case

The top court asked the state government whether the right to privacy of a person could be violated in this manner.

Advertisement

'No Privacy Left For Anybody', SC Says In Chattisgarh Govt Phone Tapping Case
info_icon

Taking serious note of the Chhattisgarh government's move to tap the phones of a senior IPS officer and his family members, the Supreme Court Monday observed, "no privacy is left for anybody".

It asked the state government whether the right to privacy of a person could be violated like this.

A bench of justices Arun Mishra and Indira Banerjee asked the Chhattisgarh government to file a detailed affidavit explaining as to who ordered the tapping of phones and the reasons for it.

"What is the need to do (things) like this? No privacy is left for anybody. What is happening in this country," the bench said, adding, "can privacy of somebody be violated like this? Who ordered this? File a detailed affidavit".

Advertisement

The top court also took exception to a separate FIR lodged against an advocate who is representing the IPS officer before the apex court.

It stayed the investigation against the lawyer and said that no coercive steps should be taken against him till further orders.

The bench also told senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, representing IPS officer Mukesh Gupta, not to politicise the issue by dragging the name of Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel in the matter.

The top court directed that the Chief Minister's name be struck off from the memo of parties in the petition.

In the petition, the IPS officer has arrayed the name of Chhattisgarh Chief Minister as one of the respondents.

Advertisement

Gupta is accused of unlawful phone tapping and in violation the provisions of Indian Telegraph Act during the investigation of civil supplies scam unearthed in 2015.

The court had on October 25 restrained the state government from intercepting the telephones of Gupta and his family and granted him protection from arrest in the cases lodged against him.

Tags

Advertisement