SG: We are all relying on a report published with 50,000 names, now anyone can say my name is on it. Whatever interception is done for National security is done as per law
SG says: If it is for fact finding then i am for it, but if it is only sensationalising which is alien to Article 32 then I cannot
SG: I’m posing a question to myself, if i file an affidavit saying Pegasus was never used, will they withdraw their petitions? If lordships are convinced it needs to be gone into, we are ready to make a Committee
SG: Kindly allow me to give a little background.
CJI: Whatever you want to say why don’t you put in affidavit, so we also get a clarity?
SG takes Court through statement made by Minister before the Parliament
Bench: If you want time you can take it, and then we can decide scope of committee etc
SG: The issue here is sensitive, attempt appears to be to make it sensational
Bench: If you want time you can take it, and then we can decide scope of committee etc
SG: The issue here is sensitive, attempt appears to be to make it sensational
Bench: listen to course we are adopting then you can continue.
CJI to SG: Sum and substance is this, affidavit filed by you is not satisfactory. Its not mentioned if government used #pegasus. Unless & until you do, they can’t move forward.
Arora: Most petitions say they want special investigation team. If govt doesn’t even take onus! the other Jurisdictions have taken note that there has been infringement of privac