MUKUL ROY Vs. UNION OF INDIA ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The counter affidavits filed on behalf of respondent nos. 3, 8 and 9, respondent no.1 and respondent no.4 have been filed in sealed covers, which were opened and read.

(2.) It has been unequivocally affirmed on behalf of respondent nos. 3, 8 and 9 that at no point of time, any directions were issued to respondent nos.4 and 5 to intercept or tap the mobile connections for any of the mobile numbers stated by the petitioner in paragraph 7. The respondents have also annexed the letters addressed by the Director General and the Inspector General of Police, West Bengal informing the Additional Secretary, Home and Hill Affairs Department, Government of West Bengal that none of the four telephone numbers in question have been "put under interception".

(3.) Similar letters have also been addressed by the Office of the Commissioner of Police, Kolkata and the Criminal Investigation Department, Kolkata. It has also been affirmed in the present petition that the apprehensions of the petitioner are unfounded.