PIL Filed Alleging Tapping of Phones of VVIPs Including Members of the Judiciary

Must Read

Federal Court Denied Involvement of US Department of Justice in Trump’s Defamation Lawsuit

Background  The Plaintiff, E .Jean Carroll, published a book where she wrote that a businessman, Donald J Trump had raped...

SC Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and...

Lawsuit Filed Against Uber for Discriminatory “Star Rating System”

The lawsuit was bought in the District Court of North California against Uber. The plaintiff claims class-action status on...

Bombay High Court To Hear Plea Seeking Removal of Chairperson of National Commission for Women

A Writ Petition had been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the conduct of the Chairperson of the...

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed...

The European Court of Human Rights Orders Germany To Pay Non-Pecuniary Damages for Prison Strip-Searches 

A serving German prisoner was repeatedly stripped searched for non-legitimate purposes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found...

Follow us

A PIL was filed in the high court of Andhra Pradesh alleging that an attempt is being made for tapping the phone calls of the judges of the honourable High Court.

Brief facts of the case 

The petitioner Nimmi Grace, filed a PIL alleging tapping of calls of a host of VVIPs including some members of the judiciary. The Government chief secretary, home secretary and the director-general of the police were made the respondents. The division bench comprising Chief Justice Jitnedra Kumar and Justice D Ramesh issued notice to the state and also asked the petitioner to file an additional affidavit with the PIL. The controversy was triggered by a report published by Telugu Daily Andhra Jyoti.

Arguments of the parties

The counsel of petitioner Ms Grace, contended that with the orders passed by the court and connivance of the government the tapping of phones was planned to malign the institution. 

The petition further stated that this act of the DGP and the state are in contravention to section 5(2) of the telegraph act 1885. It was stated that this act is also in contravention to the mandate laid by the Apex court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India. The petition stated that the alleged action of tapping phone calls is against the fundamental rights mentioned in article 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the constitution. The petitioner stated that it is not only a serious offence but also a threat to the judiciary. 

The counsel on behalf of the state and that of the DGP and principal secretary (home) have stated that these allegations fabricated and hold no merit. The government advocate Suman appearing for the DGP said it is important to make the media house also a party. 

Remedies sought by the petitioner

The PIL seeks directions to CBI, TRAI and telecom providers to not allow any phone tapping requests from the government agencies. The only allowance of any such surveillance must be in accordance with the procedure established by the apex court. The petition further seeks an independent time bound investigation by the SIT with the CBI to surface the truth of the allegations. The petitioner has further sought extensive and comprehensive guidelines for any such tapping and surveillance along with the accountability of the officials responsible.

Court’s direction

The Court has issued notice to the CBI, the centre, the state government, CVC and TRAI. The court has sought to know if the respondents have an objection to probe on allegations that phone of VVIPs including judges were tapped.

The matter is posted to August 27, 2020 for hearing.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google NewsInstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Federal Court Denied Involvement of US Department of Justice in Trump’s Defamation Lawsuit

Background  The Plaintiff, E .Jean Carroll, published a book where she wrote that a businessman, Donald J Trump had raped her in a dressing room,...

SC Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. They heard...

Lawsuit Filed Against Uber for Discriminatory “Star Rating System”

The lawsuit was bought in the District Court of North California against Uber. The plaintiff claims class-action status on behalf of all the minority...

Bombay High Court To Hear Plea Seeking Removal of Chairperson of National Commission for Women

A Writ Petition had been filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the conduct of the Chairperson of the National Commission for Women. The...

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed an Order on 25th October...

The European Court of Human Rights Orders Germany To Pay Non-Pecuniary Damages for Prison Strip-Searches 

A serving German prisoner was repeatedly stripped searched for non-legitimate purposes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that Germany had violated the...

Lack of Independent Witness Doesn’t Vitiate Conviction: Supreme Court

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Rajesh Dhiman v State of Himachal Pradesh clarified the law in case of lack of independent...

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Supreme Court Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. They heard...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -