New Delhi: A Supreme Court bench questioned while hearing the Telangana phone-tapping case why citizens should fear surveillance if they have “nothing to hide”.The oral observation by Justice B.V. Nagarathna on December 19 came as the bench extended the police custody of former Special Intelligence Branch (SIB) chief T. Prabhakar Rao until December 25.The exchange marks a paradox: the state of Telangana, usually the entity defending surveillance powers, argued vehemently against the legality of snooping to ensure the continued incarceration of its former intelligence chief.‘An open world’During the hearing on Friday, Justice Nagarathna remarked that citizens live in an “open world,” suggesting that those with clear consciences need not fear state monitoring.“The question is not whether a person is ‘bothered’ or whether he has something to hide,” countered Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Telangana government.Mehta argued that the issue was not personal guilt but the “basic right to be protected against illegal surveillance by the state machinery.”When the bench asked, “Why should anyone be bothered about surveillance unless they have something to hide?”, Mehta invoked the Supreme Court’s own landmark nine-judge Puttaswamy judgment, which enshrined privacy as a fundamental right.“My personal communications with my wife… I have a right not to be under surveillance,” Mehta submitted. He argued that the former BRS government had not just monitored targets but “profiled” them, accessing medical and personal records under the guise of combating left-wing extremism.Shifting stanceThe Solicitor General’s defence of privacy marks a shift from his previous arguments supporting the state’s right to maintain the confidentiality of its surveillance apparatus.In the 2021 Pegasus spyware case, Tushar Mehta, acting as the Solicitor General for the Union of India, submitted that the Union government could not be compelled to file a detailed affidavit regarding the use of the software, citing national security concerns. The Supreme Court subsequently observed that the state does not receive a “free pass” every time national security is invoked.Similarly, in the ongoing challenge to the WhatsApp traceability rules, the government, represented by Mehta, has sought the ability to identify the “first originator” of messages. Critics and technology firms argue that this requirement compromises the end-to-end encryption that ensures digital privacy.New SITWhile the legal battle played out in Delhi, the state government in Hyderabad moved to significantly harden its investigative grip.The Wire has accessed a memorandum issued on December 18 by the Director General of Police, announcing the formation of a new, high-powered Special Investigation Team (SIT) to take over the case (Crime No. 243/2024).The nine-member team has been placed under the direct supervision of Hyderabad Commissioner of Police V.C. Sajjanar. The memorandum mandates the team to file a charge sheet “expeditiously” under serious sections including Criminal Breach of Trust by a Public Servant (IPC 409) and Destruction of Evidence (IPC 201), alongside the IT Act.Custody extendedDespite the philosophical debate, the court granted the state’s request to extend Rao’s custody.Rao, who surrendered on December 12 following a Supreme Court directive, will remain with the Special Investigation Team (SIT) until Christmas Day. The bench ordered that he be released thereafter and directed that no coercive steps be taken against him until the next hearing on January 16, 2025.The prosecution contends that Rao, along with junior officers, conspired to destroy evidence – including hard drives and burning documents – after the BRS lost power in December 2023.‘He wants blood’The aggressive prosecution of the case is being driven by a rare alignment of interests between the ruling Congress in Telangana and the BJP at the Centre.Union minister of state for Home Affairs Bandi Sanjay Kumar, a fierce critic of the Congress, has found common ground with chief minister Revanth Reddy on this issue. Both leaders were alleged victims of the SIB’s “golden record” profiling operation.“This is also happening because the current Minister of State for Home Affairs Bandi Sanjay’s phones were tapped and he wants blood,” a source familiar with the investigation told The Wire. “It is both Revanth [Reddy] and Bandi Sanjay.”Kumar appeared before an SIT in August, alleging that over 6,500 phones – including those of judges and his own associates – were monitored. He has publicly claimed that the former intelligence chiefs “blackmailed politicians and contractors,” extorting sums as high as Rs 7 crore under the pretext of Maoist surveillance.While Kumar has publicly demanded the Enforcement Directorate (ED) intervene to trace the money trail, the state police, under Reddy, are currently pressing ahead with the custody of the former police boss.