Home       Top Rated       Submit Article     Advanced Search     FAQ       Contact Us       Lawyers in India       Law Forum     RSS Feeds     

Register your Copyright Online

We offer copyright registration right from your desktop click here for details.

Latest Articles | Articles 2014 | Articles 2013 | Articles 2012 | Articles 2011 | Articles 2010 | Articles 2009 | Articles 2008 | Articles 2007 | Articles 2006 | Articles 2000-05

Search On:Laws in IndiaLawyers Search

Mutual Consent Divorce in Delhi
We provide fast, cost effective and Hassle free solution.
Contact us at Ph no: 9650499965 (Divorce Law Firm Delhi)
File Caveat in Supreme Court
Contact Ph no: +9650499965

Main Categories
 Accident Law
 Animal Laws
 Aviation Law
 Bangladesh Law
 Banking and Finance laws
 Case Laws
 Civil Laws
 Company Law
 Constitutional Law
 Consumer laws
 Contracts laws
 Criminal law
 Drug laws
 Dubai laws
 Educational laws
 Employment / Labour laws
 Environmental Law
 family law
 Gay laws and Third Gender
 Human Rights laws
 Immigration laws
 Insurance / Accident Claim
 Intellectual Property
 International Law
 Juvenile Laws
 Law - lawyers & legal Profession
 Legal Aid and Lok Adalat
 Legal outsourcing
 Media laws
 Medico legal
 Real estate laws
 Right To Information
 Tax Laws
 Torts Law
 Woman Issues
 Workplace Equality & Non-Discrimination
 Yet Another Category

More Options
 Most read articles
 Most rated articles

Subscribe now and receive free articles and updates instantly.


Published : December 28, 2010 | Author : shishir shrivastava
Category : Constitutional Law | Total Views : 12440 | Unrated

shishir shrivastava
My name is Shishir Shrivastava. I am a second year student of law, pursuing the course of BBA LLB at MATS Law School, MATS University, Raipur (C.G)

Sting Operations: Scope and Limitations

When it comes to privacy and accountability, people always demand the former for themselves and later for everyone else” - - David Brin

The Delhi High Court on 24/09/2010 delivered a judgment on controversial Anirrudh Bahal v State, and made sting operations legal. Anirrudh Bahal and Suhasini Raj, conducted a sting operation of some Members of Parliament, in which they were offered money for asking questions in Parliament and the act was caught in the camera. Soon after the operation was over it was aired on television to expose this practice to the public.

But the pity was that after this entire incident no First Information Report (FIR) was filed by the Delhi Police against those corrupt politicians. The first FIR was filed one and half year later after this entire episode in which both of the journalists were charged as an accomplice for abetting the offence under Section 12 and 13 of the prevention of corruption act.

This raised a pertinent question before the court that: Whether a citizen of this country has right to conduct sting operations to expose the corruption by using agent provocateurs and to bring to the knowledge of common man, corruption at high strata of society?

The Court considered it to be the fundamental duty of an ordinary citizen under Article 51A(b), 51A(h) & 51A(j) to expose such practices prevailing in the system and thus for this purpose any such act or operation conducted, with the intention of doing public good is justified. The court refused to consider agent provocateurs as accomplice in such cases.

Therefore the utility of conducting sting operations (as has been described in the judgment) is to expose any practice of public officials (not only corruption), related to his official duty, which are against public interest and which if exposed will do larger public good. In all such cases a public official cannot make claim for his right to privacy.

The law with regard to such exposition of unauthorized acts of public officials is also very clear. The honorable Supreme Court of India in R. Rajgopal v State Of Tamil Nadu (1994) 6 SCC 632, has even held that in case of infringement of privacy of public officials, they have no remedy or damage available, if the act or conduct is associated with their official duty. However the Court further held that in matter not relevant to his official duty a public official enjoys the same protection as any other citizen.

The concept not only applies to public officials but equally applies to other persons as well if the gravity and impact of conduct is high as for e.g. cases dealing with scams and scandals, sedition, offences related to elections, waging of war against the State etc. In all such cases if the exposition of the acts will do larger public good than the tool of sting can be used by overriding the privacy of an individual.

Limitations: Professor Siras case
But where authority comes it should be coupled with responsibility because authority without responsibility leads to abuse of authority. The act or conduct in questions here are the private acts or conducts and thus it is very crucial to identify their association with the official conduct of the person. Any misjudgment will lead to a disastrous consequence as was met by Aligarh Muslim University Professor Srinivas Ramchandra Siras.

A gay professor (Siras) whose homosexual act was captured in camera and was exposed to university authorities, after which he was suspended from the university. In this entire course of event my only concern is with regard to the act of ‘sting operation’ conducted, which raises two issues:

Firstly just because he was a gay and the stand of the Supreme Court is not clear over gay rights, after the controversial NAZ foundation judgment of the Delhi High Court, gives any one the right to enter into their private area and expose the act of consensual sex which a normal prudent man (of any sexual orientation) would not want to get exposed to any third party? Obviously the answer is NO.

Secondly was the act or conduct in any manner associated with his official duty? Was the act or conduct in any manner was affecting his efficiency as a professor? Were his conduct in public sphere was such which was objectionable to other students or staff of the University?

Irrespective of whether the answer to the above questions is YES or NO, the act of sting operation cannot be justified. The act of homosexuality is a punishable offence under section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 due to the moral turpitude of the Indian society which consider such kind of acts to be immoral. These are a victimless offence which does not victimize anyone and are carried out in utmost secrecy, with the consent of both the partners. Therefore even if the objection is to be raised it should be based on circumstantial evidence which leads to irresistible conclusion that the homosexual act would have been performed and not by conducting sting to give a direct evidence. It is highly unethical to capture the compromising position of two consenting adults.

However the matter would have been different if there would have been a trap to expose unlawful forced sex or molestation.

Secondly if the act of sting is justified on ground that it will maintain the morality of the society than it’s nothing more than an empty euphoria. The prohibition on such kind of acts will only develop ground for such kind of acts to be carried out in secrecy and victimization of actors as is evident from the present case. In other words no regulation can stop the continuance of these activities in the society.

What public good than the act of sting operation served? Instead it brought the shame and disrepute, which forced the Professor to commit suicide. Just because he was a gay does not justify the sting, where the opinion of Indian judiciary is also changing with respect to gay rights.

Therefore it is very essential to deal with the matter in a cautious manner. Identifying the relevancy of conducting stings with due respect to the privacy of an individual should be determining the extent up to which it is feasible to enter into the private sphere of any individual.

As has been mentioned earlier, great power comes with great responsibility and therefore it is very essential to identify the manner in which it is to be used so that it does not create any nuisance to the other members of the society. For this one should identify one’s limits over others rights like privacy, which is mainly dealt in such kind of operations.

The pity is that both legislature and judiciary is silent on the subject. Where there is an urgent need of a law or any guidelines from the lawmakers of our country, they are standing as a mute spectator as if they do not have any responsibility to determine how exactly and in what circumstances the citizens of the country should exercise their freedom of speech and expression in this form.

Therefore it is urged that the matter should be taken up in manner so that both right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1) (a) and right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India are addressed in a balanced manner.

Authors contact info - articles The  author can be reached at: shishir@legalserviceindia.com

1 2 3 4 5
Rate this article!     Poor

Most viewed articles in Constitutional Law category
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, The Father of Indian Constitution
Right To Privacy Under Article 21 and the Related Conflicts
Principles of Natural Justice In Indian Constitution
Position of Fundamental Rights during Emergency
Prospective Vs. Retrospective
Reasonable Classification under article 14
Concept of Welfare State and Its Relevance in Indian Scenario
Vulnerable Groups in India - Status, Schemes, Constitution of India
Three types of emergencies under the Indian Constitution
Emergence of Article 31 A, B and C and its validity
Doctrine of Pleasure as under the Indian Constitution
Maneka Gandhi
Election Commission of India
Critical Analysis on Reservation Policy in India
Res Sub Judice, Res Judicata and Constructive Res Judicata
Most recent articles in Constitutional Law category
Procedures and Powers of Claim Tribunals
Central State Relation - Legislative, Administrative and Financial
Freedom of expression - Democracy
Right To Privacy A Fundamental Right-Uidai Violative of Individuals Right To Privacy
Debate over Sitting or Standing at Cinema Hall Whether Violation of Right to freedom of Speech and Expression
Voting Rights in India to Non-Resident Indians
Right to Privacy is a Fundamental Right - A Study
Freedom of Religion
Article 44 of Constitution: A Dead Letter to be Retrieved
Fundamental Right of The Child To Education in Andaman And Nicobar Islands
Transfer Petition in India
Role of Writs In Administrative Law
The Importance of Article 370
Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint
Fundamental Duties Under Article 51-A
Is Preamble a Part of Constitution

Article Comments

there are no comments...

Please login or register a new free account.

Random Pick
I selected Bail procedure as the topic of my current article as it is usually amongst the chief concerns of all our clients. They want their lawyer to get their family members or friends released on bail as soon as possible.

» Total Articles
» Total Authors
» Total Views
» Total categories

Law Forum

Legal Articles

Lawyers in India- Click on a link below for legal Services

lawyers in Chennai
lawyers in Bangalore
lawyers in Hyderabad
lawyers in Cochin
lawyers in Pondicherry
lawyers in Guwahati
lawyers in Nashik

lawyers in Jaipur
lawyers in New Delhi
lawyers in Dimapur
lawyers in Agra
Noida lawyers
lawyers in Siliguri

For Mutual consent Divorce in Delhi

Ph no: 9650499965
For online Copyright Registration

Ph no: 9891244487
Law Articles

lawyers in Delhi
lawyers in Chandigarh
lawyers in Allahabad
lawyers in Lucknow
lawyers in Jodhpur
Faridabad lawyers

lawyers in Mumbai
lawyers in Pune
lawyers in Nagpur
lawyers in Ahmedabad
lawyers in Surat
Ghaziabad lawyers

lawyers in Kolkata
lawyers in Janjgir
lawyers in Rajkot
lawyers in Indore
lawyers in Ludhiana
Gurgaon lawyers


India's Most Trusted Online law library
Legal Services India is Copyrighted under the Registrar of Copyright Act ( Govt of India) 2000-2017
 ISBN No: 978-81-928510-1-3