WP.Nos.5466 & 5470 of 2020 appearing for the petitioners and Mr.K.Srinivasan, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI cases appearing for the second respondent. 9. The first respondent passed order impugned in these writ petitions to intercept the telephone messages relating to the clandestine contact / movement / activity etc belong to the petitioners herein vide telephone Nos. 9841019190 and 9884218840 for the reasons of public safety, it is necessary and expedient so to do in the interest of public order and for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence dated 20.11.2014, 28.10.2014 and 30.12.2014. The grounds raised in both the writ petitions are as follows: “The impugned order is against law, arbitrary and running contrary to the fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of India. It infringes into the right of privacy of the petitioners and violative of Article 21 of Constitution of India. The tapping of telephones amount to a violation of right to freedom of speech and expression of the petitioners herein and violative of Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India. There was no public emergency which could have been enabled the authorisation of any telephone tapping and it is violative of the conditions mentioned in Section 5 (2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The impugned order could not be passed without http://www.judis.nic.in 11/22