LAKSHMANAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the uncle of the detenu, challenges the order of detention passed by the second respondent dated 28. 1. 2009.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

(3.) THE grounds on which the detention has been made are as follows: -On 22. 1. 2009, the Inspector of Police, video Piracy Cell. , Chennai Unit -I, cbcid, Chennai, along with his police party proceeded to Shop No. 278 in rajaji Salai, Chennai, and reached the spot at 11. 30 hrs. and found the detenu selling DVDs and VCDs. On a search made in the shop, the Police party seized the following items, viz. , pirated tamil New films 'villu' and 'padikathavan' DVDs -numbering 250 each, pirated Tamil New film dindigul Sarathy' DVDs numbering 200; Pirated other Tamil film DVDs 1000 Nos. , and obscene film DVDs numbering 100. Thereafter, the detenu was arrested on the same day at 13. 00 hrs. and recorded his confessional statement, according to which, he admitted the offence. The sponsoring authority sponsored the case to the detaining authority, who, after going through the materials placed before him, arrived at the subjective satisfaction that the offence committed by the detenu is against the Copy Right Act, 1957 and infringing copy rights in relation to the Cinematograph films is punishable under the Copy Right Act 1957, By such illegal distribution of compact discs infringing copy rights, the public are also indirectly being abetted to commit the said crime of infringing copy rights and thereby he has acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Thus, the detenu was branded as a 'video pirate' as contemplated under Section 2 (j) of the Act and the impugned order of detention was passed. Hence, the writ petition.