Criminal prosecution under municipal legislation for construction of a building cannot be invoked for the mere installation of a telecommunication tower on an existing structure, as such an act does not meet the statutory definition of building construction. Vicarious liability requires an express statutory provision, which is absent here.

Judgment :

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. The revisional application has been presented before this Court seeking exercise of its inherent and supervisory jurisdiction for setting at naught the criminal proceeding being Case No.181 of 2014 pending before the Learned First Municipal Magistrate at Calcutta under Section 401A of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, arising out of F.I.R. No.24 dated 31st March, 2014 and the charge-sheet no.69 dated 26th July, 2014 submitted in consequence thereof.

2. The pleadings reveal that the petitioner no.1 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, maintaining its registered office at Bharti Crescent, 1, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, Phase-II, New Delhi– 110070, while conducting its operations within the State of West Bengal through its circle office situated at Unit No.801, 8th Floor, Godrej Waterside, Sector-V, Electronic Complex, Salt Lake, Kolkata–700091.

3. The petitioner company asserts that it possesses registration granted by the Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Government of India, as a Category-I Infrastructure Provider (IP-I) under Registration No.177/2008 dated 10th January, 2008. By virtue of such registration, the company claims authority to carry on the business of providing telecommunication infrastructure and allied assets, including mobile towers, for telecom operators holding licences under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.

4. The narrative advanced in the revisional application depicts the petitioner company as an enterprise engaged in the establishment, operation, maintenance and provisioning of telecommunication infrastructure forming part of the larger national communications architecture. According to the petitioners, the services rendered by telecom operators through such infrastructural facilities constitute essential public utility services intended for the benefit of the community at large. Reference has accordingly been made to the National Telecom Policies introduced by the Union of India in the years 1994 and 1999 and subsequently revised and republished in 2012. The petitioners contend that the activities undertaken by the company stand nurtured within the policy framework evolved by the Union Government for expansion of telecommunications coverage and enhancement of communication facilities throughout the country.

5. It has further been stated that the petitioner no.1 carries on the business of providing shared telecom infrastructure services to licensed telecom operators and, for advancement of such commercial and infrastructural activities, installs both rooftop towers and ground-based towers in different locations.

6. The petitioner no.2 has been