‘Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’.
The above quote by Lord Acton beautifully sums up the practice of dominance and its abuse in the markets. Following the aegis of the duly established Competition and Anti-trust law regime globally, The Indian Competition Act 2002 in its Section 4 resonates the same principle. Just and fair competition is the backbone of a healthy market. It along these lines properly follows that the Act does not deny the pleasure regarding market dominance, monopoly, or a place of strength by a venture. Nonetheless, practically like the object of some other law, it expects to bring about a level playing field by confining the misuse or rather abuse of such dominance against a non-predominant market player. In the Era of liberalization, the markets achieved a higher position in terms to attract consumers whether it is physical or electronic. The state has the duty to preserve and procure the markets from bad practices. To certain the things in the markets and make a market distinctive in nature the competition plays a very important role. Hence it is the duty of the producers, distributors to align the things which are contrary to the anti-competitive practices. The foremost duty of every company that they must not act as dictator in the market and must not try to make the market an anti-competitive field is primary. Accountability of a firm with respect to its dominant position in the market is in itself a hefty task to be held. The regulators need to be alert with their approach otherwise they themselves might end up being a blockage to a developmental process. In this paper we analyse that when the telecom services of Reliance Jio entered the market, did they adopt such practices which led to the abuse of dominance. This paper investigates the contemporary telecom players reacted to the arrival of Jio and how section 4 of the Competition Act was called into picture in the same scenario.