Telephone Tapping is Invasion of Right to Privacy

Right to privacy is a part of right to life and liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of Constitution of India, and is extended to Telephone tapping but right to Information cannot be invoked in the matter.

The Indian Telegraph Act was enacted in the year 1885 and the Indian
Telegraph Rules was enacted in the year 1951, section 5 of sub-section 2 provides for tapping phones in case of public emergency, threat to public security; among others but no procedure and safe guard was provided either in the Indian Telegraph Act or in the Indian Telegraph rules, until 1999 after 104 years when section 419 A was inserted in Indian Telegraph Rules providing for procedures to be adopted for tapping of phones affording reasonable safe guards but not until a social organization, people Union for Civil Liberties filed a Public Interest Litigation in Supreme Court of India, since there was no provision in the Constitution of India directly recognizing the Right to Privacy as fundamental right or at least as constitutional right. It was necessary there fore to decide upon the right first.

The Supreme Court laid a triple-test to weigh the constitutional validity of a right.



1. The right must fall within the sweep of Article 19(1) (a) or Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

2. if the right canvassed is not found within the sweep of and is mere concomitant, expanse of fundamental right then validity shall not be tested with reference to clause 2 to 6 of Article 19 but from the point of view of reasonableness.

Applying the test the SupermeCourt came to the conclusion that Right to Privacy and for that matter telephonic conversation was a part of Article 21 i.e. Right to Life and Liberty which couldn’t be curtailed except according to procedure established by law.

Since neither the Telegraph Act nor the Telegraph Rules contained any procedures for phone tapping, giving un-bridled freedom to the authorities, it laid down detailed procedures. The procedures were ultimately incorporated in Indian Telegraph Rule by way of insertation of Rule 419 A n the year 1999. Rule 419 A says:

That only secretary to Central Government or secretaries to State Governments as the cause may be give order for interception of messages only when the information could not reasonably be acquired by other means.

The Order can be in force for a period of 90 days unless revoked earlier and in any case it shall not exceed 180 days.
The Order shall be reviewed by a high power review committee within 60 days of the date of Order to ensure that the Order is in accordance with the purposes set out in the section 5 (2) Of Indian Telegraph Act and I it is found otherwise the Direction shall be set aside and all copies of interrupted messages shall be ordered to destructed.

It is now settled; position of law that phone tapping is a secret affair and a citizen cannot invoke the Right to Information Act to seek information or document regarding phone tapping.

Ngos belling the cat

The registered societies engaged in social work and activism, which in course of time came to be known as N.G.Os' full form No-government Organizations. The word which over the time has acquired a halo of prestige. have now come under scanner, amidst serious allegation of corruption and of siphoning off grants among others and the final nail coming from no other but the powerful Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

In its latest report the C.A.G has alleged that a sum of Rs.7000 cores was granted to the Ngoc’s for various social projects till 1999 against which a total sum of Rs.7535 crores has not been accounted for by the NGOs. The Government was supposed to receive 30517 utilization certificates against the grant, prompting the department to demand that the NGO's prompting the department to demand that the NGOs be brought under statutory cover.

CAPART, Council for Advancement of People Action in Rural Technology was established in year 1986 to implement various approved socio-politico-economic aimed at urban and rural crippled segment of the society. CAPART is supposed to provide financial aid and guide lines to NGOs and monitor progress of those who have received grants from it.

The first budgetary allocation to provide financial aid to the NGOs was made in seventh five year plan-1190-1995.

Mr. S.B Medhi, observer of National Human Rights Commission of India has alleged that the NGO's in India has emerged as global corporate.

Intelligence Bureau of India has alleged in report that a bribe of Rs. seven lakh was given by an Ngo in a central Government Ministry to procure a grant of Rs. 60 lakhs approx sanctioned in its favor.
The Manipur State Government has taken a lead in the matter by forming a high power nodal agency to monitor the functioning and utilization of funds by NGOs in the state.

There are demands for legislation of new laws to make the NGOs transparent, democratic and to bring them under the purview of rights to information Act 2005 and to put a check on registration and recognition of societies.

The judge has suggested that the expert services of the NGo's may be availed of, sanse finance on partnership basis in select fields on merit basis.

Most of the societies are registered under Societies Registration Act, 1886, with the Registrar of Societies by following a simple procedure and payment of nominal fees.