Madras High Court
Indus Towers Limited vs The District Collector on 17 April, 2026
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M. Nirmal Kumar
WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026
Indus Towers Limited
Rep by its Authorized Signatory MR.Paridhi
Arasu,
No.5, Espee IT Park,
5th Floor, Jawaharlal Nehru Road,
Ekkatuthangal, Chennai.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The District Collector
Kanchipuram.
2. The Superintendent of Police
Kanchipuram.
3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Sriperumbudur Sub-Division,
Kanchipuram.
4. The Inspector Of Police
C1, Sriperumbudur Police Station,
Kanchipuram.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: The writ petition (Crl.) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 4 to
provide necessary police protection to the petitioner for their mobile phone
tower works at the premises being about 1200 square feet of land comprised in
S.No.1053/9, Plot No.165, Chellaperumal Nagar layout, Sriperumbudur,
Kancheepuram falling within the district administration of the 1st respondent,
on the representation dated 05.03.2026 sent by SPAD to the 4 th respondent and
pass such further or other orders.
__________
Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026
For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Anil Sandeep
For Respondent(s): Mr.R. VINOTH RAJA
Govt. Advocate (CRL. SIDE)
FOR R2 TO R4
ORDER
This writ petition (Crl.) has been filed to directing the respondents 2 to 4 to provide necessary police protection to the petitioner for their mobile phone tower works at the premises being about 1200 square feet of land comprised in S.No.1053/9, Plot No.165, Chellaperumal Nagar layout, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram falling within the district administration of the 1st respondent, on the representation dated 05.03.2026 sent by SPAD to the 4th respondent.
2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a company incorporated under the provision of the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged inter alia in the establishment, development, maintenance and operation of telecommunication infrastructure, including but not limited to fiber networks, ducts, right of way corridors, passive telecom towers, and associated infrastructure, throughout the State of Tamil Nadu and other parts of India, for enabling licensed Telecommunication Service Providers (TSPs) to render seamless mobile telecommunication and digital connectivity services. For the said purpose, the petitioner has commenced preparatory works for the installation of a mobile telecommunication tower. The petitioner had also __________ Page2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026 entered into a lease agreement with the owner of the property and had taken steps to install the cell phone tower. Already, the Government of Tamil Nadu has granted exemption to all the Telecom companies to install the cell phone towers by virtue of Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 01.04.2002.
3.When the petitioner attempted to erect the cell phone tower, some people with vested interest claiming to be neighbours have been causing hindrance and preventing the workers from carrying out the construction work. In this regard, the petitioner gave a representation to the 4 th respondent on 05.03.2026, seeking police protection. However, the 4 th respondent had not acted upon the said representation and therefore, the present Petition has been filed.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in this petition is covered by the earlier Judgments of this Court. The learned counsel brought to the notice of this Court the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.16618 of 2018 dt.28.06.2018.
5.It will be appropriate to extract the relevant portions of the order in Crl.O.P.No.16618 of 2018, which is extracted hereunder:-
“2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit __________ Page3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026 that the petitioner's company had the contract agreement for installation of cell phone tower with M/s.Indus Towers Limited, a company registered under the provisions of Indian Companies Act, 1956. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that whenever the petitioner's company attempted to erect transmission cell phone tower, publics are causing interference. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that by order dated 05.03.2015, the Honourable First Bench of this Court, in W.P.Nos.24976 of 2008 and etc., batch, held that because of the advancement in the science, no one has prevented to erect cell phone towers. It is also submitted that the petitioner has given a complaint dated 24.02.2016 to the first respondent police seeking police protection, for which C.S.R.No.42 of 2016 and since the same has not been considered so far, he has come up with the present petition for the relief stated supra.
3.Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to send a fresh representation to the respondent and on receipt of the same, the respondent is directed to consider the representation to be submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
__________ Page4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026
5.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.”
6.This Court has consistently taken the view that no one can be prevented from erecting the cell phone towers on a mere apprehension about the effect of radiation from the cell phone tower. The apprehension does not have a scientific backing. Till a positive finding is given in this regard, cell phone towers cannot be prevented to be installed on mere apprehensions.
7.For the reasons stated above, there shall be a direction to the 4 th respondent police to provide police protection to the petitioner for erection of the cell phone tower. The 4th respondent police shall ensure that the entire process goes on in a smooth manner, without giving raise to any law and order problem.
8. This writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.
17-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sms __________ Page5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026 To
1. The District Collector Kanchipuram.
2. The Superintendent of Police Kanchipuram.
3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Sriperumbudur Sub-Division, Kanchipuram.
4. The Inspector Of Police C1, Sriperumbudur Police Station, Kanchipuram.
5. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.
__________ Page6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
sms WP Crl. No. 859 of 2026 17-04-2026 __________ Page7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis