'Problem Of Taking Statements Out Of Context' : CJI On N Ram Being 'Trolled' Over Pegasus Case Hearing

The social media controversy into which N Ram, former Editor-in-Chief of 'The Hindu' daily and one of the petitioners in the Pegasus case, was dragged found a mention in the Supreme Court during today's hearing.

When the Chief Justice of India NV Ramana made remarks disapproving "parallel debates" in Facebook, Twitter etc., about the case by the petitioners while the Supreme Court is seized of the matter, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who represents N Ram, mentioned the issue.

During the previous hearing on August 5, the bench had asked Sibal if it was correct to say that the California court, which is hearing the case filed by WhatsApp against NSO Technologies (the developer of Pegaus spyware), had passed an order mentioning the name of Indians targeted by the snooping.

Sibal had replied that there was no such mention in the Court order.

Following this, several Twitter users alleged that N Ram had lied to the Court. This led to Ram making a statement in Twitter that his petition has no statement that California court has passed any order mentioning Indians in the target list. Instead, the petition had referred to a report published by 'The Guardian' daily mentioning the names of Indians in the list, Ram tweeted.

Today, in response to the observations made by the CJI, Sibal said :

"When I was appearing for Mr N Ram last time Your Lordships said to me that I had said that Indians have been targeted but I said that the California court has not said so...".

Sibal added that Ram was "trolled" and "mud was thrown on him" in the social media.

"The man was severely trolled and mud was thrown on him", Sibal said.

"This is the problem of taking statements out of context. I was expressing a doubt if I read the document correctly", the CJI said.

The CJI added that no one should cross the limits and all should have full faith in the system. He urged the parties to avoid "parallel debates" and said that whatever needs to be told to the Court should be brought through affidavits or through their respective lawyers.

"This is the message of me and my two brothers. All petitioners are expected to answer the queries of the court through the debate in the court. If they want to say something through Twitter, social media etc, it is for them. You all have come to the court and you speak through the counsels. We don't want parallel debates. You have faith in the system. There must be discipline. If they want to bring anything to the notice of the court, you bring through affidavit. We expect they answer our queries through a proper debate in court hall and not outside," CJI Ramana said.

The bench, also comprising Justices Vineet Saran and Surya Kant, adjourned the hearing of the petitions seeking judicial or SIT probe into the Pegasus snooping controversy to August 16 after Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta sought time to get instructions.