11/22/2015

StingOperation

LegalServiceIndia.com

Articles
legalprofessional,studentsandyesyoutoocanvoice
youropiniononanypointoflaw.

Chatwithus(6PM9PMIST)

LegalNewsLegalAdviceJudgmentsIncomeTaxformsForumFindalawyerLawyersMembership
SearchOn:

LawsinIndia
Search

FreeSupremecourtJudgments...... OnlineCopyrightRegistration
AvailableforDownloadClickhere

Clickhere

ArticleArchive
Articles2008

Articles2007

Articlessubmittedin2006

Articles200005

StingOperation
Category:

Home\CivilLaws

Article:

StingOperationTobeornottobe?
AStingOperationisanoperationdesignedtocatchapersoncommittingacrimebymeansofdeception.Acomplicatedconfidence
gameplannedandexecutedwithgreatcare.ThewordstingderivesitsoriginfromAmericanusagetomeanapoliceundercover
operationdesignedtoensnarecriminals.Thewordstingisasynonymfortheexpressionsetatraptocatchacrookandthisarticle
usestheterminthatsense.Inmorerefinedterms,itcanbecalledInvestigativeJournalismorUndercoverJournalism.StingOperationis
aninformationgatheringexerciseitlooksforfactsthatarenoteasytoobtainbysimplerequestsandsearches,orthosethatareactively
beingconcealed,suppressedordistorted.
Aninformedcitizenrythebedrockofademocracy,holdingthegovernmentaccountablethroughvotingandparticipationrequires
investigativejournalismwhichcannotsustainitselfonasymmetricdisseminationofinformation.Inmanycases,thesubjectsofthe
reportingwishthemattersunderscrutinytoremainundisclosed.AmongthemostpopularprogrammesinIndia,arethosereportingon
corruptionandmisdeedsofpoliticiansandgovernmentofficials.Candidcamera,reportsmanytruestoriesofthedaythebribethatthe
policeinspectorextractsfromthevictimofacrimebeforeagreeingtoinvestigate,thefeethatthegovernmentofficerchargesforhis
givingtheordertomakeanelectricconnection,andthecontributionthatacompanypaysamemberofParliamentbeforebringingupa
legislativeconcernintheLokSabha.BecauseofallthesethingsdowereallyrequireStingOperations?Atthesametime,wheresuch
investigativeworkinvolvestheuseofcovertmethods,itraisesissuesthattendtofurtherblurthelinebetweenlawandethics.Is
deceptionlegitimatewhentheaimistotellthetruth?Isanymethodjustifiablenomattertheworkingconditionsandthedifficultiesin
gettinginformation?Cantelevisionreportersusehiddencamerastogetastory?Canjournalistsusefalseidentitiestogainaccessto
information?Thecriticalquestionthatsurfacesistowhatextentcanthemediagoandtowhatextentshouldapersonbeinformed?
StingOperationsInIndia
StingOperationsareundertookwithaviewtolookintotheworkingofthegovt.ortoseewhethertheactsofanyindividualisagainst
thepublicorder.OnthebasisofthepurposeStingOperationscanbeclassifiedaspositiveandnegative.PositiveStingOperationisone
whichresultsintheinterestofthesociety,whichpiercestheveilsoftheworkingofthegovernment.Itiscarriedoutinthepublic
interest.Duetopositivestingoperationsocietyisbenefitedbecauseitmakesgovernmentresponsibleandaccountable.Itleadstothe
transparencyinthegovernment.Ontheotherhandnegativestingoperationsdonotbenefitthesociety,buttheydoharmthesocietyand
itsindividuals.Itunnecessarilyviolatestheprivacyoftheindividualwithoutanybeneficialresultstothesociety.ThesetypesofSting
operationsifallowedthenitwillhamperthefreedomoftheindividualsandrestrictstheirrights.Herearesomeexampleswhichwecan
distinguishaspositiveandnegativestingoperations.
1.PositiveStingOperations:
StingoperationsonultrasoundcenterscarriedoutbytheHealthofficersinKarnatakaforseriousenforcementofthePreNatal
DiagnosticTechniquesActwhichbanssexdeterminationoffoetusesandconsequentabortionoffemaleonestostopfemalefoeticide.
TheMinistry(bytheCableTelevisionNetworksRegulationActandProgrammeCode),hasprohibitedthetransmissionofCineworld
channelfor30daysforshowingobjectionablecontent.Becauseitoffendedgoodtasteanddecencyanditwasobsceneandlikely
tocorruptpublicmoralityandwasnotsuitedforunrestrictedpublicexhibition
AnoperationbyanonlinenewssitecalledTehelkatocatchtoppoliticiansandarmyofficerstakingbribesfromjournalistsposingas
businessmen.
AnoperationinwhichajournalistposingasastrugglingactressmetactorShaktiKapoor,whopromisedinthetelevisedfootagethat
hissecretarywouldintroducehertomovieproducersanddirectors.
2.NegativeStingOperations:
Instancesovertheyearshaveshownthatthoughstingoperationsdoexposecorruptioninsomecases,sometimestheyseriouslyviolate
therulesofjournalisminthepursuitofprofitandshorttermsensationalism.
TheDelhiHighCourtonFriday,7thSeptember,2007,issuednoticestotheDelhigovernmentandcitypoliceaftertakingsuomotu
cognisanceofmediareportsallegingthatastingoperationcarriedoutbyaTVchannel,whichclaimedtohaveexposedasexracketrun
byagovernmentschoolteacherUmaKhurana,forallegedlyluringherpupilsintoprostitutionhasnowbeenrevealedtobecompletely
fabricatedandwasfakeanddistorted.
TheSupremeCourtonWednesday,7thFebruary,2007,issuednoticestoaprivatenewschannelanditsreporterforcarryingouta
stingoperationcarriedoutintheyear2004,whichallegedlyshowedanonbailablewarrantcouldbeprocuredagainstanypersonby

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l166StingOperation.html

1/4

11/22/2015

StingOperation

payingaheftyamountinthecourt.
Theseincidentsareanexampleofhowastingoperationcangowrongandbecomeanexerciseintrappinganinnocentperson.India
TVschiefeditor,RajatSharma,saidthattherewasnoviolationofprivacyinexposingsuchmattersaspoliticalcorruptionorthe
tradingofjobsforsexinBollywood,apracticeknowninmovieandtheatricalbusinessloreasthecastingcouch.Ifyouareserious
aboutexposingcertainsocialevils,thereisnootheroptionbuttousestingoperations.
DoWeReallyNeedStingOperations?
Themediaplaysanimportantroleinademocraticsociety.ItactsasthefourthinstituteoutsidetheGovernment.Stingoperationsare
methodsofuncoveringinformation.Although,theIndianConstitutiondoesnotexpresslymentionthelibertyofthepress,itisevident
thatthelibertyofthepressisincludedinthefreedomofspeechandexpressionunderArticle19(1)(a).VariousConstitutionshave
guaranteedfreepressormediaasafundamentalright.Freedomofpressisaspecialrightunderart.19(1)(a)oftheConstitutionof
India,1950butithascertainrestrictions.Thedemocraticcredentialsarejudgedbytheextentoffreedomthemediaenjoysinaparticular
state.Furtherthemediahasarighttoimparttheinformationtothepublic.Freedomofspeechincludesfreedomtocommunicate,
advertise,publishorpropagateideasandthedisseminationofinformation.FurthermoreArt.19(1)alsoincorporateswithinitselfright
toreceiveinformationaboutanyevent,happeningorincidentetc.TheheartofjournalismhastobepublicinterestandSting
operations,servepublicinterest.
InRomeshThapparv.StateofMadrasCourtsaid,.Thepublicinterestoffreedomofdiscussion(ofwhichthefreedomofpressis
oneaspect)stemsfromtherequirementthatmembersofademocraticsocietyshouldbesufficientlyinformedsothattheymayinfluence
intelligentlythedecisionswhichmayaffectthemselves..Insomethefundamentalprincipleinvolvedhereisthepeoplesrightto
know.
Thisconceptofpeoplesrighttoknow,whichwasfoundtobesoessentialfordemocracy,waslocatedbytheCourtinArticle19(1)(a)
inBennettColemanandCo.v.UnionofIndiaobservingthus:
AlthoughArticle19(1)(a)doesnotmentionthefreedomofthepress,itissettledviewoftheCourtthatfreedomofspeechand
expressionincludesfreedomofthepressandcirculation.
TheCourtheld:
PresshasafundamentalrighttoexpressitselfthecommunityhasarighttobesuppliedwithinformationandtheGovernmenthasa
dutytoeducatethepeoplewithinthelimitsofitsresources.
JusticeMathewsruledinthecaseofStateofUPv.RajNarain,Thepeopleofthiscountryhavearighttoknoweverypublicact,
everythingthatisdoneinapublicwaybytheirpublicfunctionaries.Theirrighttoknowisderivedfromtheconceptoffreedomof
speech.
InS.P.Guptav.UnionofIndia,NodemocraticGovernmentcansurvivewithoutaccountabilityandthebasicpostulateof
accountabilityisthatpeopleshouldhavetheinformationabouttheworkingoftheGovernment.
InPrabhaDuttv.UnionofIndiatheSupremeCourtupheldtherightclaimedbythepresstointerviewprisonersthattherightclaimedby
thePresswasnottherighttoexpressanyparticularvieworopinionbutrighttomeansofinformationthroughthemediumofinterview
oftheprisoners.
InIndianExpressNewspapers(Bombay)PrivateLtd.andOrsv.UnionofIndiaandOrs.,theCourtemphasizedthatthefreedomof
pressandinformationwerevitalfortherealizationofhumanrights.ThecourtreliedupontheArticle19oftheUniversalDeclaration
ofHumanRights,1948
WhyNoToStingOperations?
Withgreatpowercomesgreatresponsibility,thereforethefreedomunderArticle19(1)(a)iscorrelativewiththedutynottoviolateany
law.Everyinstitutionisliabletobeabused,andeveryliberty,ifleftunbridled,mayleadtodisorderandanarchy.Televisionchannelsin
abidtoincreasetheirTradeRelatedPractices(TRPs)ratingsareresortingtosensationalizedjournalism.Stingoperationshavenow
becometheorderoftheday.Thecarryingoutofastingoperationmaybeanexpressionoftherighttofreepressbutitcarieswithitan
indomitabledutytorespecttheprivacyofothers.
InTimev.HilltheU.S.SupremeCourtsaid:Theconstitutionalguaranteeoffreedomofspeechtopressisnotforthebenefitofthe
presssomuchasforthebenefitofallthepeople.ThesameprinciplewasfollowedbyMathew,J.inBennettColemanandCo.v.Union
ofIndia.
Article19(2)AnExceptiontoArticle19(1):Itishoweverpertinenttomentionthat,freedomofspeechandexpressionofpressisnot
absolutebutisqualifiedbycertainclearlydefinedlimitationsunderArticle19(2)intheinterestsofthepublic.
InRomeshThapparv.StateofMadras,andBrijBhushanv.StateofDelhitheCourtfirmlyexpresseditsviewthattherecouldnotbe
anykindofrestrictiononthefreedomofspeechandexpressionotherthanthosementionedinArt19(2)andtherebymadeitclearthat
therecouldnotbeanyinterferencewiththatfreedominthenameofpublicinterestevenwhenClause(2)ofArticle19wassubsequently
substitutedundertheConstitution(FirstAmendment)Act,1951byanewclausewhichpermittedtheimpositionofreasonable
restrictionsonthefreedomofspeechandexpressionofmedia.
AgainstRighttoPrivacy:Theindividualwhoisthesubjectofapressortelevisionitemhashisorherpersonality,reputationorcareer
dashedtothegroundafterthemediaexposure.Hetoohasafundamentalrighttolivewithdignityandrespectandarighttoprivacy
guaranteedtohimunderArticle21oftheConstitution.TheSupremeCourt,KharakSinghv.StateofUPheldthatrighttoprivacyis
inherentunderArticle21.TheDelhiHighCourtobservedthatrighttoprivacythatflowsfromArticle21couldntbeinvokedagainst
privateentities.Itcannotbedeniedthatitisofpracticalimportancethataprecariousbalancebetweenthefundamentalrightto
expressionandtherighttoonesprivacybemaintained.RighttoPrivacyhasceasedtohaveanypragmaticvaluewheresting
operationsdefinetheorderoftheday.Therighttoprivacyisanallegedhumanright,whichmayrestrainbothgovernmentandprivate
partyactionthatthreatenstheprivacyofindividuals.IthasbeenrecognizedasafundamentalrightbytheHonbleSCunderArticle21.
TheSupremeCourtinR.RajagopalandAnotherv.StateofTamilNaduandOthersaretruereminiscenceofthelimitsoffreedomof
presswithrespecttotherighttoprivacy:
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l166StingOperation.html

2/4

11/22/2015

StingOperation

Acitizenhasarighttosafeguardtheprivacyofhisown,hisfamily,marriage,procreation,motherhood,childbearingandeducation
amongothermatters.Noonecanpublishanythingconcerningtheabovematterswithouthisconsentwhethertruthfulorotherwiseand
whetherlaudatoryorcritical.Ifhedoesso,hewouldbeviolatingtherighttoprivacyofthepersonconcernedandwouldbeliableinan
actionfordamages.Positionmay,however,bedifferent,ifapersonvoluntarilythrustshimselfintocontroversyorvoluntarilyinvitesor
raisesacontroversy.
InanotherlandmarkjudgmentwhichaddressedtheissueofprivacywasthetelephonetappingcasePeoplesUnionforCivilLiberties
v.UnionofIndiatheCourtobserved:
TherighttoprivacybyitselfhasnotbeenidentifiedundertheConstitution.Asaconceptitmaybetoowideandmoralistictodefineit
judicially.Whetherrighttoprivacycanbeclaimedorhasbeeninfringedinagivencasewoulddependonthefactsofthesaidcase.
AgainstPublicMorality:Thereistheclassicethicalproblemthathauntsallstingoperations:canyouholdsomebodyresponsiblefora
crimethathewouldnothavecommittedifyouhadntencouragedhim?Theessenceofallentrapmentisthatyoupromiseamana
rewardforbreakingthelawandthen,apprehendhimwhenhetakesthebait.Allstingoperationsinvolvemakingpeoplecommitcrimes
thattheywouldnototherwisehavecommittedandarethereforeimmoral.Itisagainstthepublicmoralityanddecencyandhencefalls
withinthepurviewofArticle19(2).
The17thLawCommissioninits200threporthasmaderecommendationstotheCentretoenactalawtopreventthemediafrom
interferingwiththeprivacyrightsoftheindividuals.
ProblemsWithStingOperations
Theclassicethicalproblemthathauntsallstingoperations:canyouholdsomebodyresponsibleforacrimethathewouldnothave
committedifyouhadntencouragedhim?Theessenceofallentrapmentisthatyoupromiseamanarewardforbreakingthelawand
then,apprehendhimwhenhetakesthebait.Adefencethatcanbetakenbytheaccusedthattheacthadbeencommittedasaresultof
inducement,andwhichhe(theaccused)didnotintendhimselftocommit,or,incaseswherelackofconsentconstitutestheoffence,
suchasrape,thattheconsenthadbeenimpliedbytheinducement,wherebecauseofthetraplaiddownfortheaccused,theimpression
givenwasthatanoffencehadnotbeencommitted.
Fundamentalrightscantbeenforcedagainsttheindividualorprivateentity:WhenManekaGandhisuedKhushwantSinghovercertain
referencestoherinhisautobiographyTruth,LoveandaLittleMalicesayingthatitwasaviolationofherprivacy,shelostthecase.It
ispreciselybecauseofthislackoflegislationthatwehavenumerousSingOperationstakingplacealmostdailytherebyobtrudingupon
individualprivacy.However,despitethegrowinginvasionofprivacy,thereisnoIndianlegislationthatdirectlyprotectstheprivacy
rightsofindividualsagainstindividuals.
ConflictofLaws:Althoughononehand,theConstitutionconfersthefundamentalrightoffreedomofthepress,Article105(2)provides
certainrestrictionsonthepublicationsoftheproceedingsinParliament.InthefamousSearchlightCase,theSupremeCourtheldthat,
thepublicationbyanewspaperofcertainpartsofthespeechofmembersintheHouse,whichwereorderedtobeexpungedbythe
Speakerconstitutedabreachofprivilege.
Anothermajorproblemwhichwefacetodayisagainstwhomthestingoperationisallowed?Someareoftheopinionthatitmustbe
allowedagainstthepublicservants.ThedefinitionofPublicServantisgivenin2(c)ofThePreventionofCorruptionAct.Againa
problemcomesthatcanwehavestingoperationagainstthepublicservantswhentheyarenotintheircourseofduty?Therearesomany
problemswhicharisebecausewedonothaveproperlegislation.Wecansaytherootofalltheseproblemsisthelackoflegislationfirst
andanythingafter.
PositionOfStingOperationInIndia
InIndiawehavenospecificlawwhichgovernssuchoperationandalsowehavenojudicialpronouncementstilltodaywhichguides
suchoperationsortheactsofthemedia.Butapersoncangotothecourtunderdifferentlawstoprotecthisrightsandfreedom.Wehave
wiretappingwhichisapartofstingoperationisregulatedundertheTelegraphActof1885.In1996decisionbytheSupremeCourt
whichruledthatwiretapsareaseriousinvasionofanindividualsprivacyTheCourtalsolaidoutguidelinesforwiretappingbythe
government,whichdefinewhocantapphonesandunderwhatcircumstances.OnlytheUnionHomeSecretary,orhiscounterpartinthe
states,canissueanorderforatap.Thegovernmentisalsorequiredtoshowthattheinformationsoughtcannottobeobtainedthrough
anyothermeans.TheCourtmandatedthedevelopmentofahighlevelcommitteetoreviewthelegalityofeachwiretap.Tappedphone
callsarenotacceptedasprimaryevidenceinIndiancourts.
Apartfromthecommonlaw,theSupremeCourthasrecognizedaconstitutionaloriginaswell.So,firstly,aprivateactionfordamages
maylieforanunlawfulinvasionofprivacyunderTheLawofTorts.Thesestingoperationsalsoviolatesrighttoprivacywhich
accordingtotheSupremeCourtisguaranteedunderArticle21righttolifeandpersonalliberty.Asweareprovidethatthefreedomof
expressionguaranteeinArticle19(1)(a)isnotabsolutethereforetheconstitutionprovideswithArticle19(2)whichprotectsthepublic
interestmoralityanddecency.Apersonwhowelcomesmediainterestinhislifewillnotbeabletoclaimarighttoprivacyaseasilyasa
privateindividual.Thereisvastroomforinterpretation,especiallywithtermssuchasprivateaffairsandpublicinterestand
interpretationwillbemadebytheregulatoryauthorityeventhoughtheonusonprovingthataparticularpublicationwasinpublic
interestlieswiththemediahouse.Undoubtedly,thejurisprudenceoftheSupremeCourtwillcertainlyinfluenceinterpretationTheApex
Courthasalwaysupheldtheimportanceofaninformedcitizenry.Astingoperationwithagenuinemotivetocreateawarenessof
wrongdoing,cannotbeproscribedorprohibited.
FinalRemarks:
TheUnionInformationandBroadcastingMinistrymustfavourtheintroductionofaclausetoaddressStingOperationsinthe
BroadcastingBill.TheMinistrymustmakeacleardistinctionbetweenstoriesthatamounttoaninvasionofprivacyandthosewhich
exposecorruptionorhavepoliticalimplications.However,StingOperationswhichexposecorruptionandtellstorieswithpolitical
implicationswillbeallowed,asanyattempttoproceedagainstthemwouldbeseenasanefforttostiflethemedia.
Whatjournalistsandeditorsneedtodetermineiswhowillbenefitasaresultofthereporting.Ifjournalismiscommittedtodemocratic
accountability,thenthequestionthatneedstobeaskediswhetherthepublicbenefitsasaresultofspecificinvestigativereports.Does
thepressfulfillitssocialresponsibilityinrevealingwrongdoing?Whoseinterestsarebeingaffected?Whoserightsarebeinginvaded?Is
theissueatstakeamatteroflegitimatepublicinterest?Whattheregulatorybodywillneedtodetermineiswhowillbenefitasaresultof
thereporting.Istheissueatstakeamatteroflegitimatepublicinterest?Thesearesomequestionswhichneedtobeansweredwhen
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l166StingOperation.html

3/4

11/22/2015

StingOperation

goingforastingoperationorgoingformakinglegislationonit.
Thelegislationmustgoverntheconductofthemediaandmustdefinetheextentmediacanstingapersonslifeandwhomtheycan
sting?IntheUSforexample,itisonlythefederalgovernmentandtheFBIalonehastherighttouseahiddencameraandgoforsting
operation.InIndiatoosomebodylikeCBIoranyotherbodymustonlybelegalizedtoperformstingandtheirconductmustbe
regulatedthroughthelegislations.Thisbodymustnotbeimmunetoanylegalproceedings.Theremustbeaproperauthoritylikecourt
orAttorneyGeneral,whosepermissionmustbesoughtonproperproofagainstthesubjectofthesting.Thesubjectofthestingmust
havetheevidenceofcriminality
TodaythestingoperationsistakingplaceforcommercialgainsthereforetheSupremeCourtshouldtakeobservationsaboutit.Problem
withthemediaisthatitonlycampaignsforcaseswhichappealtoitsmarketanditsimagination,whichmayresultinitsgoodreputation
infrontofthesociety.
Toavoidfallingintothattrap,thestingoperationsneedacodeofconduct.Lawstoo,shouldbestrengthenedinthisregard.Sting
operationsarecompletelyjustifiediftheyarecarriedoutwiththeprotocolthathasbeentalkedabout.

Theauthorcanbereachedat:yogendra@legalserviceindia.com

AddedDate: 4Feb2008
Lenght:

3498words

Views:

2391

AvgRating:
AbouttheAuthor:YogendraAldak
Student2ndyear,B.A.LL.B.(HONS.),NationalLawInstituteUniversity,Bhopal,M.P.

LawyersinIndia ClickonalinkbelowforlegalServices
lawyersinDelhiNewDelhi
lawyersinChandigarh
lawyersinSurat
lawyersinNashik
lawyersinJodhpur
lawyersinJaipur

lawyersinChennai
awyersinJanjgir
lawyersinIndore
lawyersinAllahabad
lawyersinAgra
lawyersinAhmedabad

lawyersinKolkata
lawyersinHyderabad
lawyersinRajkot
lawyersinNagpur
lawyersinCochin
lawyersinLucknow

lawyersinMumbai
lawyersinBangalore
lawyersinPune
lawyersinPondicherry

MutualconsentDivorcein
Delhi
ClickHere

CopyrightRegistrationinIndia

Phno:9891244487

Phno:9650499965

AboutUs|LawForms|LegalAdvice|SupremeCourtJudgments|Divorcelaws|Lawyers|Submitarticle|Sitemap|ContactUs
legalServiceIndia.comisCopyrightedundertheRegistrarofCopyrightAct(GovtofIndia)20002013
ISBNNo:9789382417019

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l166StingOperation.html

4/4