Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. On 18th July 2021, a consortium of nearly 17 journalistic organizations from around the world, including one Indian organization, released the results of a long investigative effort indicating the alleged use of the Pegasus software on several private individuals. This investigative effort was based on a list of some 50,000 leaked numbers which were allegedly under surveillance by clients of the NSO Group through the Pegasus software. Initially, it was discovered that nearly 300 of these numbers belonged to Indians, many of whom are senior journalists, doctors, political persons, and even some Court staff. At the time of filing of the Writ Petitions, nearly 10 Indians’ devices were allegedly forensically analyzed to confirm the presence of the Pegasus software.

20. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners in Writ Petition (C) No. 853 of 2021 submitted that the Petitioners are senior journalists who are victims of the Pegasus attack. He submitted that if the Respondent­Union of India had made a statement on affidavit that it had not used a malware or spied on the Petitioners in an unauthorized manner, that would have been the end of the matter. Instead, the Respondent­Union of India had not provided any information on affidavit. He therefore urged the Court to constitute an independent Committee under its supervision rather than allowing the Respondent­Union of India to constitute a Committee, as suggested by the learned Solicitor General, to avoid any credibility issues. He further submitted that requiring the Petitioners to hand over their phones to a Committee appointed by the Respondent­Union of India, when certain allegations had been raised against the Respondent­Union of India, would amount to a secret exercise whose results would not be trusted by the Petitioners or the public.

21. Mr. Dinesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner in Writ Petition (C) No. 848 of 2021 submitted that his client is a respected journalist whose device had been infected with the Pegasus malware. The main thrust of his submission was that if any pleading was not specifically denied, it would be deemed to have been admitted. As the Respondent­Union of India had not specifically denied the Petitioner’s allegation, the same should therefore be deemed to be admitted by the Respondent­Union of India. Learned senior counsel submitted that such an attack on the privacy of the Petitioner was not only a violation of his fundamental right, but also amounted to chilling his freedom of speech as a journalist.

40. An important and necessary corollary of such a right is to ensure the protection of sources of information. Protection of journalistic sources is one of the basic conditions for the freedom of the press. Without such protection, sources may be deterred from assisting the press in informing the public on matters of public interest.

41. Having regard to the importance of the protection of journalistic sources for press freedom in a democratic society and the potential chilling effect that snooping techniques may have, this Court’s task in the present matter, where certain grave allegations of infringement of the rights of the citizens of the country have been raised, assumes great significance. In this light, this Court is compelled to take up the cause to determine the truth and get to the bottom of the allegations made herein.