The Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified that merely possessing spyware for national security purposes is not unlawful, but deploying it against private citizens is a serious matter.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh made the observation while hearing a series of petitions seeking an independent probe into allegations of government surveillance using Pegasus spyware.
“There’s nothing inherently wrong with a country having spyware. The issue is who it’s used against. National security cannot be compromised, but civil liberties must also be protected,” said the bench.
The court’s remarks came after senior advocate Dinesh Dwivedi, representing petitioners, raised the central question of whether the Indian government was using the Israeli Pegasus software to spy on individuals.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, countered that national security concerns should prevail, stating, “Terrorists cannot claim the right to privacy.”
However, the bench responded that constitutional protections still apply to ordinary citizens. “If a civil individual’s privacy is being violated, that’s a different matter and must be addressed under constitutional safeguards,” the judges said.
Pegasus Spyware Allegations Resurface
The Supreme Court was hearing multiple pleas that allege the government used Pegasus to target journalists, activists, politicians, and members of the judiciary. The court deferred further hearing to July 30, 2025, allowing petitioners to submit a ruling from a U.S. court in a case brought by WhatsApp against Pegasus’ parent company, NSO Group.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, sought the court’s permission to present a U.S. District Court judgment, which reportedly identifies India among countries where Pegasus-related hacks occurred.
Sibal also urged the court to release the Justice Raveendran Committee’s findings to affected individuals, after redacting any sensitive content. Another senior advocate, Shyam Divan, argued for complete disclosure of the committee’s report, citing the principle of open court.
The bench agreed to inform affected individuals but emphasized that national security concerns must take precedence. “Yes, individual concerns need addressing. But sensitive material cannot be turned into public debate,” the court said.
Pegasus Inquiry & Findings
Previously, the Supreme Court had set up an independent committee to investigate the alleged Pegasus snooping. The panel, headed by retired Justice R.V. Raveendran, included experts such as Alok Joshi, former IPS officer, and Dr. Sundeep Oberoi, a cybersecurity standards authority.
The technical team was made up of cyber forensic experts:
- Dr. Naveen Kumar Chaudhary (National Forensic Sciences University)
- Dr. Prabaharan P (Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham)
- Dr. Ashwin Anil Gumaste (IIT Bombay)
The committee examined 29 mobile devices, finding malware in five. However, it concluded that there was no definitive evidence of Pegasus infection in any of the phones. The panel also reported that the Indian government did not cooperate with the investigation.
Ongoing Legal Battle
The Supreme Court had earlier said that any form of indiscriminate surveillance violates democratic principles and fundamental rights. Multiple high-profile petitioners have approached the court, including journalists N. Ram and Sashi Kumar, MP John Brittas, former minister Yashwant Sinha, advocate M.L. Sharma, and ideologue K.N. Govindacharya.
Other petitioners include journalists reportedly targeted by Pegasus such as S.N.M. Abdi, Rupesh Kumar Singh, Prem Shankar Jha, and Ipsa Shatakshi, along with the Editors Guild of India.
These petitioners have demanded a probe led by a sitting or retired Supreme Court judge and argued that unauthorized surveillance using military-grade spyware violates the fundamental right to privacy under Articles 14, 19, and 21, as affirmed in the landmark KS Puttaswamy judgment.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
