This writ petition is filed assailing the order of the 1st respondent dated 17-11-2003 passed in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 5 (2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 directing interception of messages from the mobile telephone of the petitioner.

2. The facts, in brief, are as under:-

The third respondent herein filed charge sheet No. 2/2005 dated 19-09-2005 in the C.B.1. Court, Visakhapatnam against three accused, the writ petitioner being A-2, for an offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC read with Section 7, Section 13 (1) (e) and Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The same was taken cognizance as C.C.No.1 of 2006 on the file of the C.B.I. Court, Visakhapatnam.

3. As per the charge-sheet dated 19-9-2005, the investigation revealed that between 11-11-2003 and 25-11-2003, there were telephonic conversations between the complainant and the accused persons, which established the demand of illegal gratification by A-1 and A-2, which was conveyed by A-3 to the complainant. The conversations were recorded by the complainant on two audio cassettes. The Special Unit of C.B.I., New Delhi was monitoring the communication to and from Telephone No. 98-484-61953 belonging to A-2 (writ petitioner) after obtaining the approval of the competent authority Vide order No. 14/3/97 -CBI dated 17-11-2003, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. The call details of the accused persons and the complainant collected during the investigation established that the accused were involved in corrupt activities. Along with the charge sheet, list of documents consisting of 55 documents were filed, in which, the order of the Government of India dated 17 -11-2003 purportedly passed in exercise of the powers under Section 5 (2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (for short, the Act) read with Rule 419-A of Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951 (for short, the Rules) was filed as Document No. 37.

4. Having obtained certified copies of the said documents, including the order of the 15t respondent, dated 17-11-2003, this writ petition is filed contending inter alia that the interception of messages from the mobile telephone of the petitioner and recording the same are wholly illegal and without jurisdiction.

5. I have heard Sri E. Manohar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee, the learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent as well as Sri T. Niranjan Reddy, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.

6. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to extract Section 5 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 as under:-

5. Power for Government to take possession of licensed telegraphs and to order interception of messages:-

(1) On the occurrence of any public emergency or in the interest of the public safety, the Central Government or a State Government, or any officer specially authorized in this behalf by the Central or a State Government may, if satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do, take temporary possession (for so long as the public emergency exists or the interest of the public safety requires the taking of such action) of any telegraph established, maintained or worked by any person licensed under this Act.

(2) On the occurrence of any public emergency, or in the interest of public safety, the Central Government or a State Government may, if satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with Foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence, for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, direct that any message or class of messages to or from any person or class of persons, or relating to any particular subject, brought for transmission by or transmitted or received by any telegraph, shall not be transmitted, or shall be intercepted or detained, or shall be disclosed to the Government making