The Supreme Court on Friday stayed further proceedings of a Commission of Inquiry appointed by the West Bengal Government to look into allegations of snooping using the Pegasus software.
A Bench led by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana impleaded the commission, comprising former Supreme Court judge, Justice Madan B. Lokur, and retired Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court Jyotirmay Bhattacharya. The court issued notice to the panel to be served through its secretary.
The order was passed after an NGO, ‘Global Village Foundation’ Trust, made an urgent plea that the commission was going ahead with a ‘parallel inquiry’ into Pegasus allegations.
The Supreme Court has already appointed a committee led by retired Supreme Court judge, Justice R.V. Raveendran in October to ‘expeditiously’ examine the Pegasus snooping reports.
The West Bengal Government's move in July to appoint a Commission of Inquiry was first heard by the Supreme Court in August.
At the time, the Supreme Court had only issued pre-admission notice to the Centre on August 17 on petitions seeking an independent inquiry into allegations that the Government used the Israeli-based spyware to snoop on journalists, activists, dissenters, parliamentarians, Ministers and other citizens.
Editorial | Probing Pegasus: On Bengal ordering inquiry into snooping row
During the hearing on August 25, the Supreme Court initially wanted to pass a formal order to stop the commission from going ahead with its inquiry when the case was already pending before the court.
However, the State Government, through senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, had given an oral assurance to the court to convey a ‘message of restraint’ to the commission.
On Friday, Mr. Singhvi, appearing for the State Government, said the message of restraint had been conveyed to the commission as promised. The commission had stopped its work till the court had passed orders in October.
Mr. Singhvi said the State Government could not interfere in the working of the Commission of Inquiry, and it was now up to the Supreme Court to pass any formal orders for the commission.
This led the court to implead the commission, issue notice and order the stay of further proceedings.
