Fundamental Rights – Mala tide arrest and detention tor political reasons – Articles 12(1), 12(2), 13(1), 13(2) and 14(1) of the Constitution – Time-base At the Katana Mahapola celebration held at Harischandra Vidyalaya a bomb explosion took place to disrupt the procession and two hand grenades were thrown – one of which struck a student and rolled on to the ground without exploding a few yards from the Hon. Amarasiri, Minister of Trade and Hon. Wijayapala Mendis, Minister of Textile Industries (5th respondent) and the others exploded causing injuries to…
Read MoreTag: lawpoints
WELIGODAPOLA v. SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF WOMEN’S AFFAIRS AND TEACHING HOSPITALS AND OTHERS | 1989 2SLR 63
The law recognizes that the principles of equality does not mean that every law must have universal application’for all persons who are not, by nature, attainment or circumstances in the same position. What is required is that persons who by nature, attainment or circumstances are similar are treated alike. If there is a classification which deals alike with those who are similarly situated, someone who is different cannot be allowed to complain that he has not been treated equally; for being different, he must necessarily expect to be treated differently.…
Read MoreSamanthilaka Vs Ernest Perera and Others. the judgement was given by supreme court S. C. APPLICATION No. 65/88.
Gamaralalage Samanthilake alleged that The violation by certain police officers. the petitioner who Samanthilake concerned her fundamental right of freedom from arrest, except according to procedure established by law [Article 13 (1)]; her right to personal liberty and freedom from detention or custody, except after being produced before a judge of the nearest competent court, upon and in terms of an order of such judge made in accordance with procedure established by law[Article 13 (2)]; and the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or…
Read MoreAMAL SUDATH SILVA v. KODITUWAKKU, INSPECTOR OF POLICE AND OTHERS | 1987 2SLR 119
The petitioner has established that he has been subjected to torture and cruel treatment by the Police whoever they be, despite doubts about the exact identification of the particular Police Officers, when he was under arrest. The police force is an organ of the State. The State is liable to pay compensation to the victim. Per Atukorale, J. ‘The report of the M.O. is in my view, valueless and unworthy of acceptance. On his own showing it is evident that he has not carried out an independent examination of the…
Read MoreANSALIN FERNANDO v. SARATH PERERA, OFFICER-IN-CHARGE, POLICE STATION, CHILAW AND OTHERS, the judgement was given by supreme court. S.C. APPLICATION NO. 18/87
her petition dated 18.02.87 the petitioner complains that her son the 6th respondent (a University student) was arrested at their house in Chilaw on 02.01.87 at about 3.30 p.m. by a police party who assaulted him with fists and took him away in a jeep without giving any reason for the arrest; that thereafter the 6th respondent was detained at the Bandaragama Police Station where he was subjected to assaults and other ill-treatment; that the 6th respondent was last seen on the evening of 04.02.87 after which she was informed…
Read MoreROBERTS 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 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 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 More