The controversy between the political executives of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh over alleged telephone tapping (interception) on Thursday took an interesting turn with Justice Vilas Afzulpurkar of the Hyderabad High Court staying all further proceedings before the court at Vijayawada.
The trial court at Vijayawada had earlier directed telecom service providers to place on record the complete information regarding the interception of certain numbers used by officers and ministers of the AP Government. The judge was dealing with two writ petitions filed by Principal Secretary of the Telangana Home Department.
The orders of the Third Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, were challenged in these writs. The court at Vijayawada directed the telecom companies to place on record the interceptions made, if any, and all the pertinent records.
Ram Jethmalani, senior counsel who, appearing for the Telangana state, assailed the orders of the court at Vijayawada, said the registry of the High Court raised objections regarding the maintainability of a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. He contended that Telangana State Government was not party before the court at Vijayawada and that the writ petition was maintainable.
P. Venugopal, Advocate-General of Andhra Pradesh, said such a writ petition was not maintainable and that the proceedings before the criminal court could not be assailed in writ jurisdiction. He reminded the court that the telecom companies were directed by the Supreme Court to place the material before the Vijayawada court in a sealed envelope. Justice Vilas Afzulpurkar rejected the objections regarding the maintainability. The writ petitions are maintainable.
Natarajan, Additional Solicitor-General of India, told the court that the Union of India acts under Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act empowered the Government to take possession of licensed telegraphs and to order interception of messages. He said interception was legal, procedure was followed and the courts could not call for records. He said the entire correspondence regarding the interception was privileged document and could not be disclosed or forced to be disclosed even before the court of law.
He said the contents of interception were with the law enforcing agency of the State ( Telangana). Justice Vilas Afzulpurkar declared that there shall be stay of further proceedings.
