The Center told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that its responses to petitions on the Pegasus dispute are sufficient, and that whatever material it should submit to the court for review can only be done through an expert committee while maintaining complete confidentiality. To be sure, given the sensitivity of the situation
The petitioners had raised the issue of whether the virus was employed or not by the government, its agencies, or any private organization as “non-committal,” and had created a committee of specialists to advise the government. voiced displeasure with the course recommended by the government
The court called the UOI’s affidavit a “limited affidavit,” and advised SG Tushar Mehta to seek instructions and consider his options if the Center wanted to file a more extensive response.
The SG informed the bench on Tuesday that the union’s short affidavit is regarded as “I have filed an affidavit which is sufficient.”
Without commenting on the substance of the arguments, the Bench led by Justice Nazeer stated the opinion that the case should be heard by a bench led by Justice Rao.
Senior counsel KV Viswanathan supplemented Rohatgi’s arguments by claiming that if the material sought in its raw form is released to the public, it will cause panic and may cause major economic damage.