The counsel also refuted Star Health’s allegations that Pathak had raised these issues in a bid to extort money.
The Court, however, expressed reservations about Pathak’s plea and his bonafides.
Justice Bagchi remarked that hacking into a system to expose its vulnerabilities may not be the right way to go.
“We are not hacking. We are finding vulnerabilities in these systems on the basis of which anybody can access the data,” Bhushan clarified.
“Like a locksmith who comes into a house, breaks into the house and then says there is a security vulnerability?” asked Justice Bagchi
“No. Everyone is getting in. That’s what they pointed out to them… I have highlighted the security vulnerability. This very company was reportedly hacked in 2024,” replied Bhushan.
Bhushan went on to suggest that if the Court is unsure of Pathak’s motives, it can still examine the larger issues raised by appointing an amicus curiae for assistance, without Pathak being a formal party to the case. Bhushan asserted that Pathak’s work was well-intentioned.
“We have done it (checking data vulnerabilities) for six government organisations. Every time we pointed out that this was a vulnerability in their system, they had to fix that vulnerability. We are rendering valuable public service,” he said.