Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(ii) Tapping of phones in the instant case has been done in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hukam Chand Shyam Lal Vs. Union of India [reported in 1976 (2) SCC 128].

(iii) The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.M.Malkani Vs. State of Maharashtra [reported in 1973 (1) SCC 471] has categorically stated that the argument based on right to privacy is not available to a guilty citizen against the efforts of the police to vindicate the law. Hence, the prayer of the petitioner is not https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/07/2025 01:33:27 pm ) maintainable and ought to be dismissed.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/07/2025 01:33:27 pm ) Have the respondents complied with the procedural safeguards set out in Rule 419-A of the Rules :

68. In the decision in People's Union for Civil Liberties, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had issued various directions/procedural safeguards under Article 142, which were required to be mandatorily followed in all cases of phone tapping. These directions were incorporated into the Rules as Rule 419-A by virtue of the Indian Telegraph (Amendment) Rules, 2007.