RAMANI BABU Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the second petition preferred by the father of the detenu challenging the detention order dated 23. 3. 2005 detaining one Jagadeesan as a video Pirate under section 2 (j) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that by order dated 9. 8. 2005, in the earlier habeas Corpus Petition filed by the very same petitioner, (vide hcp. No. 411/2005), this Court after considering all the contentions raised therein and after finding that there is no merit in the said contentions, upheld the order of detention and dismissed the said Petition.

(3.) IN the present Habeous Corpus Petition, the petitioner has raised two additional contentions. The first additional contention is that inasmuch as the detaining authority has referred to and relied on an irrelevant fact viz. , Chapter 16 of the Copy Right Act 1957, the ultimate conclusion and the order of detention is liable to be set aside. While elaborating the above contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that inasmuch as there is no Chapter 16 in the Copy Right Act, 1957, reference made to chapter 16 makes it different that the detaining authority has not applied its mind before passing the order of detention.