In a ruling that upholds the case for special laws to deal with terrorism and other serious crimes, the Supreme Court has restored the power of the Maharashtra police to tap the phones of terror suspects as well as suspected members of organised crime syndicates. These intercepts can be used as evidence in trial courts, it added.
The verdict is a shot in the arm for Maharashtra police, asking for special powers against terrorists. But the repercussions of the ruling may spread beyond the boundaries of the state to boost the case for special laws, being opposed over fears of misuse and breach of privacy.
Upholding the provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act (MCOCA) arming the state police with power to tap telephone conversations and use the intercepts as evidence, the apex court brushed aside the reasoning of the Bombay high court that states could not make laws on the subject since it was covered by a central law.
The power to intercept telecommunication links between accused under sections 13 to 16 of MCOCA was struck down as unconstitutional by Bombay HC in December 2003 on a petition filed by then MCOCA case accused Bharat Shah.
Section 13 dealt with appointment of a competent authority, section 14 provided for authorisation of interception of wire, electronic or oral communication, section 15 gave the procedure for constitution of a committee for review of authorisation orders and section 16 carved out the exceptions.
POWER LINES Terror suspects’ phones can be tapped
Overrules earlier Bombay high court judgement
Order will impact ongoing trials Maha cops get a shot in the arm
New Delhi: The Maharashtra police who considered the absence of authority to tap telephones as a major handicap, received a shot in the arm when the Supreme Court restored their rights to tap the phones of terror suspects as well as suspected members of organised crime syndicates.
The conventional laws — Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code and the Indian Evidence Act — treat interception of telephone conversations at best as circumstantial evidence admissible before the trial court only if there’s sufficient corroborative evidence.
The Mumbai HC had earlier held that the Maharashtra legislature did not have the competence to enact a law permitting the police to intercept telephone and other electronic communication as the subject had already been covered by central legislation such as Indian Telegraph Act.
Allowing the Maharashtra government’s appeal against the HC order and accepting arguments of counsel Shekhar Naphade and Ravindra Adsure, a bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Ravindran and M K Sharma took a pragmatic view saying overlapping of legislation, especially in the given situation in the country, was permissible and that there was nothing amiss in sections 13 to 16, making intercepts as admissible evidence.
The SC bench, however, has balanced the recognition of security needs with concerns about the abuse of privacy. Interception can be done only with prior approval of top police officers.

All News  | Popular News | News Category | Submit News