The Supreme Court emphasized that state surveillance must have legal checks and cannot operate like criminal networks.
The key issue is who can be legitimately targeted, not just whether spyware like Pegasus can be used.
Allegations of surveillance against journalists, politicians, judges, and activists raised serious concerns.
The government has not confirmed or denied using Pegasus spyware, which is sold only to states.
A court-appointed technical committee struggled due to lack of cooperation from both the government and alleged targets.
Surveillance must not be used to suppress dissent or label critics as anti-nationals.
National security concerns must not override due process and individual rights.
There must be clear protocols and oversight mechanisms for surveillance activities.
Judicial and legislative oversight is needed to prevent executive overreach.
Surveillance powers must not be misused to interfere in democratic processes or curb activism.
The Court underlined that India’s constitutional values must guide security actions.
COMMENTS