The petitioner was travelling in a bus at Nawalapitiya when he was arrested by the 3rd respondent. He was not informed the reason for his arrest. He was taken to a security personnel camp and kept there and repeatedly assaulted by the 3rd respondent and other security personnel. He was forced to make a statement on the lines suggested by the 3rd respondent. He was not released after his statement as promised but continued to be kept in unlawful detention. The respondent said the petitioner was arrested because he was…
Read MoreCategory: Supreme court
ROBERTS AND ANOTHER v. RATNAYAKE AND OTHERS |1986 2SLR 36
The second petitioner, the Sri Lankan wife of the 1 st petitioner a foreigner, held tenancies of 3 stalls and two bare land leases from the Kandy Municipal Council at the Jathika Pola, Tomlin Park. Kandy where she carried on several businesses including that of a cafe. The petitioners complain they have been the victims of a relentless and unceasing series of attempts to deprive the 2nd petitioner of her tenancies and destroy her business by improper…
Read MorePREMALAL PERERA VS WEERASOORIYA | 1985 3SLR 177
The petitioner an employee of the Government Railway Department complained that a circular authorising the deduction of a contribution from him to the National Security Fund in the absence of objection by him infringes {1) his Fundamental Right of freedom of thought, conscience and freedom (Article 10, 14(1) (e) of the Constitution) because the money is to be used to buy arms and weapons which will be employed in the destruction of human life and violence which is repugnant to the tenets of the Buddhist faith and belief which he…
Read MoreThe case of Kapugeekiyana vs Hettiachchi and two others S.C. No. 80/84.
The petitioner, a suspect in a murder case complained that about 6.00 a m. on 13.6.1984 the 1st and 2nd respondents entered his house, searched it and took into custody documents and files belonging to him without a search warrant. Thereafter without a warrant of arrest they arrested him and took him to the 4th Floor of the C.I.D. Office, Colombo 01. There they subjected him to harassment, assault, torture, duress. humiliation and cruel, inhuman, degrading and barbaric treatment. the judgement was compensation ordered for illegal detention. the court…
Read MoreJAYANETTI v. THE LAND REFORM COMMISSION AND OTHERS |1984 2SLR 172
The petitioner had made an application to the Land Reform Commission (1st respondent) to purchase 50 acres out of Mount Pearl Estate an agricultural land and annexed to it a letter of recommendation from the then Member of Parliament the 6th added respondent as this was an administrative requirement for such an application. By letter dated 4th March 1982 the Regional Director of the Commission informed the petitioner that the request could not be granted because the Member of Parliament had withdrawn his recommendation owing to strong objection raised by…
Read MoreGunawardena vs Perera and Others S.C. APPLICATION NO.20/83.
The petitioner who are the Gunawardena and others are going to passed the Kollupitiya police station with caring the banner. the policeman who came in suddenly and take the banner. The photographer who is going on road and take the photo. after he was arrested by police. the petitioner and other go to police station for take off him. and after petitioner who is Gunawardena and others were subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by policeman. The judgement was the petitioner and others arrested in unlawful and contravened Article…
Read MoreFERNANDO vs ATTORNEY GENERAL AND ANOTHER case of supreme court. S.C. APPLICATION NO. 2 OF 1983
The petitioner, sought a declaration stating that the Respondents (the police) violated his fundamental rights of freedom of thought, and conscience, subjected him to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment, illegally arrested him and did not inform him of the reason, for such arrest and violated his fundamental right of freedom of speech. he was attending a peaceful assembly and one day fast to protest against the detention of three Christian clergymen, a doctor, a University lecturer and his wife. after the petitioner and others were members of an…
Read MoreVELMURUGU v. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND ANOTHER |1981 1SLR 406
The petitioner a member of the District Development Council for Amparai was prevented by army officers when travelling in a car with 3 others to go to the 4th Colony. He was stopped at the junction on the 4th colony and obliged to turn back and go back towards Kalmunai.On the way he apparently received various complaints of houses being burnt and assault. The petitioner put down the 3 persons who were in his car and proceeded back again towards the 4th Colony. On the way he met Fr. Elmo…
Read MoreAIYATHURAI THADCHANAMOORTHI ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS VADIVEL MAHENTHIRAN V. ATTORNEY GENERAL AND OTHERS |1978 1SLR 154
The applicants in both applications had petitioned this Court under Article 126 of the Constitution of an infringement of a fundamental right by executive or administrative action. They alleged in their petitions that the acts, complained of constituted a violaton of the guarantee afforded to them in terms of Article 11 of the Constitution. (As both applications were similar in nature, in that both petitioners had alleged a violation of Article 11 of the Constitution, and as the officers against whom the allegations were made were the Inspector of Police…
Read MoreThe case of velmurugu vs the attorney general and other. the judgement was given by supreme court S. .C. NO. 74/81.
The petitioner a member of the District Development Council for Amparai was prevented by army officers when travelling in a car with 3 others to go to the 4th Colony. He was stopped at the junction on the 4th colony and obliged to turn back and go back towards Kalmunai. On the way he apparently received various complaints of houses being burnt and assault. The petitioner put down the 3 persons who were in his car and proceeded back again towards the 4th Colony. At this junction on the orders…
Read More