Phone Tapping in India: Contrasting Judgments by Madras and Delhi High Courts

Relevance: GS II Polity 

As the Delhi High Court and the Madras High Court issued conflicting rulings regarding the constitutionality of phone tapping, the practice’s legitimacy in India was once again called into question. The Madras High Court invalidated a similar order, highlighting the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21, while the Delhi High Court maintained an interception order, citing the need to prevent incitement to crime. 

About Ruling on Phone Tapping

Phone tapping was discussed in both courts for the purpose of “preventing incitement to commit a crime.” One of the legitimate justifications for permitting phone tapping is this. While the Madras High Court revoked the interception order, the Delhi High Court maintained it.

• The Madras court ruled that, absent a legally mandated method, telephone tapping violates the right to privacy (a fundamental right under Article 21).

Note: Stay informed about the most recent UPSC current Affairs, where we provide clear explanations of the major stories.

India’s laws on phone tapping:

Under the recently passed Telecommunications Act, 2023, the Telecommunications (Procedures and Safeguards for Lawful Interception of Messages) Rules, 2024, establish the due process and procedure for the government to lawfully intercept messages sent by the nation’s inhabitants.

• The 2000 Information Technology Act: This law regulates the interception of emails, WhatsApp messages, and other communications.

The Supreme Court’s decision in the 1997 case of People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India:

• Established procedural protections for the application of Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act, upholding its constitutionality.

Only the state and federal home secretaries have the right to issue orders for phone tapping, and they expire after two months unless they are renewed.

Mains:

Question: Do the current legal frameworks such as the IT Act, 2000, and the Telecommunications (Procedures and Safeguards for Lawful Interception of Messages) Rules, 2024, adequately protect citizens’ fundamental rights in the face of state surveillance? Substantiate your view.

MCQs

Note: To take practice tests on Daily current Affairs MCQs, click the link that is attached.

Question: Consider the following statements regarding the Madras and Delhi High Court rulings on phone tapping:

1. The Delhi High Court quashed the phone tapping order citing the right to privacy.
2. The Madras High Court upheld the phone tapping order on grounds of national security.
3. Both courts dealt with phone tapping under the ground of “preventing incitement to commit a crime.”
4. The right to privacy is protected under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only

(b) 3 and 4 only

(c) 1, 3, and 4 only

(d) 2, 3, and 4 only

Answer: (b) 3 and 4 only

UPSC Exam 2025 Related Articles

UPSC General Studies Paper Preparation