New Delhi: Amid the ongoing row over a New York Times report claiming India bought Pegasus as part of a USD 2 billion defense deal with Israel in 2017, a fresh plea has been filed in the Supreme Court on the alleged use of the Israeli spyware.
The plea filed by advocate ML Sharma said the deal was not approved by the Parliament and, therefore, needs to be canceled and money be recovered.
Sharma, one of the original petitioners in the case, urged the apex court to issue suitable directions for registering a criminal case and to investigate the impugned Pegasus spyware purchase deal and alleged misuse of public funds in the interest of justice, PTI reported.
The New York Times has in an investigation report titled “The Battle for the World’s Most Powerful Cyberweapon” said the Israeli spyware Pegasus was sold to India.
“In July 2017, Narendra Modi, who won office on a platform of Hindu nationalism, became the first Indian prime minister to visit Israel,” the report published in the New York Times on Friday said.
“For decades, India had maintained a policy of what it called ‘commitment to the Palestinian cause,’ and relations with Israel were frosty,” the report added.
The report further said Prime Minister Modi’s “visit, however, was notably cordial, complete with a carefully staged moment of him” and then Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu “walking together barefoot on a local beach”.
“They had reason for the warm feelings. Their countries had agreed on the sale of a package of sophisticated weapons and intelligence gear worth roughly $2 billion — with Pegasus and a missile system as the centerpieces,” the report added.
Earlier on Saturday, the Opposition lashed out at Prime Minister Modi-led government over the New York Times report alleging the ruling dispensation indulged in illegal snooping that amounted to “treason”.
The Supreme Court had earlier on October 27 last year appointed a three-member panel of cyber experts to probe the alleged use of Pegasus for surveillance of certain people in India.
The apex court had then said the state cannot get a “free pass” every time the spectre of national security is raised and it cannot be the bugbear that the judiciary shies away from.
,