WP.Nos.5466 & 5470 of 2020 satisfying the five circumstances as mentioned under Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act. As per the impugned order, telephone record details which have been annexed and furnished are much prior to the date of sanction and it shows the fact that the illegal recording were carried out without any sanction order to intercept the telephonic message of the petitioners.” 10. The orders impugned in these writ petitions were passed by the first respondent herein to intercept any telephone message relating to clandestine contact / movement / activity etc to and from 9841019190 and 9884218840 of the petitioners herein for the reasons of public safety, in the interest of the public order and for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence. The petitioner's conversation were unlawful to commit an offence. The first respondent passed order with complete application of mind taking into consideration of the circumstances prevailing in the matter after having satisfied himself on the basis of the materials placed before the first respondent that the circumstances of the case warrant lawful interception. Further the action of the interception in the present case was for detection, prevention, investigation and prosecution of corrupt activities, in which the petitioners were indulging. The learned Senior Counsel contended that there was no public emergency which could have enabled the authorisation of any telephone http://www.judis.nic.in 12/22