Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi, Jan 30: Supreme Court advocate Manohar Lal Sharma has filed a fresh plea in the Supreme Court on the alleged use of Israeli spyware Pegasus, seeking that the court take cognizance of an allegation in a New York Times report and order a probe into the 2017 defence deal with Israel.
Advocate ML Sharma moved the Apex Court demanding an FIR to be registered against the concerned officer or authority for the transaction.
The application quoted a New York Times report that said the Indian government had purchased Pegasus in 2017 as part of a $2 billion package for weapons, including missile systems.
The NYT, in a report titled ‘The Battle for the World’s Most Powerful Cyberweapon’, had stated the Israeli firm NSO Group had for nearly a decade been ‘selling its surveillance software on a subscription basis to law-enforcement and intelligence agencies around the world, promising that it could do what no one else — not a private company, not even a state intelligence service — could do: consistently and reliably crack the encrypted communications of any iPhone or Android smartphone.’
Notably, the Supreme Court has already stayed the Justice Lokur Commission set up by the West Bengal government to probe the Pegasus case. Lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi had said that the commission is a statutory body and the government cannot issue orders to it.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana asked the Lokur Commission to issue a notice to the Commission of Inquiry, prohibiting any kind of investigation by the Lokur Commission.
CJI Ramana had also instructed West Bengal’s lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi, “You said that you will not do anything in the investigation work now.” Singhvi had responded saying,
“According to your order, we informed the Commission about it. The court has ordered that the Commission will not investigate till the matter is pending in the Supreme Court.” Singhvi further suggested that the CJI issue a notice to the Commission as well.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court had also said that the state cannot get a ‘free pass’ every time the spectre of national security is raised and it cannot be the ‘bugbear’ that the judiciary shies away from.
The court had said it is appointing the committee in view of the six compelling circumstances– Right to privacy and freedom of speech are alleged to be impacted, which needs to be examined; the entire citizenry is affected by such allegations due to the potential chilling effect, no clear stand taken by the Centre regarding actions taken by it and seriousness accorded to the allegations by foreign countries and involvement of foreign parties.
