The High Court · 2025

the FIR No. 67 /2017, dl.2}- 02-2017 and FIR No. 1005/2013' dt.01-12-2013 as illegal, arbitrary b) and consequently direct the Respondents to frame Special Guidelines or Restrictions, that would necessarily lead to a licensing regime being created to curb and regulatd the rampant sale both online and r:ffline of spy cameras only through authorized dealers, c) and further direct the Respondents to forthwith to take ne,essary steps to ban the sales of SPY Canreras in open markets, both online and offline. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may b,e pleased to direct the Respondents to Constitute a high{evel investigation comrnittee headed b.y a sifting or retired "ludge of this Hon'ble Court, comprising of the Principal Secretaries of the Home Departments of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, Senior Police Officials and r:'/ber-crime experts, representatives from civil society, particularly experts in data protection and privacy to investigate incidents of illegal spy camera usage, trace perpetrators, recommend legislative reforms, and ensure prosecution under relevant provisions of law, including Sec:tion 66E and -fechnology Act., 2000, and other applicable provisions in 67 of the lnformation the interest of justice. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WP(P|L) MP. NO:498 OF 2017) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may tre pleased to direct the respondent authorities to regulate the sale of spy cameras in the open market both online and offline only through authorised agencies under the supervision/ Control of the State Government pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : MS.P.SREE RAMYA Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DY.SOL.GENERAL Counsel for Respondents No.2&3 : SRI MAHESH RAJE, GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondents No.4&5:SRl B.RAJESHWAR REDDY, GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER l', I a .) THE HONOURABI,E TIIE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AI{D THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENT'XAYARA WRIT PETITI ON IPILI No.2 54 ot2Ol7 ORDER (oral): (Per Hon'bte Tle Acting Chief Justice) Ms. P. Sree Ramya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India' for respondent No.1.

2. With the consent, finallY heard'

3. The relief prayed by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition (PIL) is as follows: '...to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ or rui""al-"s (a) declaring the action of tl.e Respondents i. ."t iJi;; the charge.sheets/hnal reports before the concernea.or.t" i., iursuant r; the FIR No.67 l2Ol7, dt.-2o- "u..iooiliol3 dr. or-r2-2}13 as illegal o2_2lt7 and FrR arbitrary, @) and <:ot'"tq"ttttty direc.t the Respondents'jo' fra1le -'nttttlttio"s" that would necessarily lead to Special Guidelines' o' ,ii"..*i"g regime being created to-curb and regulate the rampant sale both o.rti.r" ,.rf, offline of spy carneras onlv .thr9w.h authorised a.,ftt",*iti and turther direct the Respondents to forthwith to take t'ttJt""y steps to !-1" ftt sales of SPY Cameras in open markets U"tt' cr"ii"t and offline and to pass such ottrer order or orders. ' ''

4.lrarnedcounselforthepetitionerfairlysubmitsthat relief (a) of the aforesaid relief is not pressed' So far remaining reliefsareconcerned,itiscontendedbythelearnedcounselfor the petitioner that spy cameras are easily available in t-Le market 2 and they are L,eing misused, AS such, there must be some regulatory meastres to be introduced by the Governmr:nt. Thus, in this regard, rek:vant guidelines are required to be isstred.

5. Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel for responclent No.l, submits that. in <:ase of breach of anybody's privacy, Se,:tl6n 77 og the Bharatiya N1,aya Sanhita, 2023 atd, Section 66 E of the Information Tectrnolory Act, 2000, are available to take care of such eventuali.tie s.

6. We have heard the parties on this aspect. 7 . Whether or not sale of spy cameras is to be regulated is a subject within th.r: province of the Iaw makers/Gorrernrnent. We do not see any such Public Interest Litigation involvr:d in this matter whictr netrcssitates this Court to issue such dire:ctions. It is matter of comrnon knowledge in the present times that a,lmost every mobile phone which is being carried by commcn man is equipped with a carnera. Thus, in this era of technologr, we do not find it necessary to issue aly such orders.

8. In view of Lhe forgoing analysis, the Writ petition (public Interest Litigation ) is disposed of. There shall be no order as to -) costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. i \ To,

1. IITRUE COPYI/ sD/-T. JAYASREE e UTYREGIS loN OFFICER ion Of lndia, Sastri The Under Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs' Bhavan, New Delhi' Department Secretariat Buildings' State of Telangana State Pradesh , Amaravath i At Velagapudi, Guntur District AP

2. The Prl. Secretary' Home, Telangana, Saifabad , HYderabad{22 s Office, Lakdi-kaPool' HYderabad 3.7he Director General of Police/DGP DGP' 4. The Prl. Secretary' Home DePartment Secretariat Buildings, State of Andhra 5. The Director General of Police/DGP New DGP's OfFrce, at, Mangalagiri' 6. OneCCtoS Rl P.SREE RAMYA Advocate IOPUCI 7. Tvno CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUTI 8. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh at (DeouU SolicitorGeneral of tndia)' 9. One CC to SRI GADI PRAVE EN KUMAR, yberbudo- [oPUCl High Court for the State of Tel angana at H Amaravathi. lourl Guntu0ist.' AP 1O.Two CD CoPies BSK LS \r' HIGH COURT DATED:1910312025 ORDER WP(PIL).No.254 of 2017 -. :". 22t,t -?ilfr ',n * a Il4_r (]1,i l=:=- DISPOSING OF THE wRtT PET|T|ON (PtL) WITHOUT COSTS + ( $ 14 2r5