CJ directs to include Defence Secretary, IGP in an FR petition

By Stanley Samarasinghe
Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva yesterday advised petitioner W.L.S. Rodrigo to include Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and Inspector General of Police Victor Perera as respondents to a fundamental rights application submitted by the petitioner in the Supreme Court.

The Chief Justice emphasised that the Supreme Court had to consider the case as a matter of public interest.

He pointed out that the behaviour of the police officers who were on duty at the check point caused the petitioner to be in remand for an offence which he had not committed.

“The check points are established to check any person or persons on suspicion, but not to discover offences. Even on discovering offences police officers should behave in a decent manner,” he made these observations while granting leave to proceed with a fundamental rights case came before Supreme Court.

The Bench comprised Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva and Justices Nimal Dissanayake and Andrew Somawansa.

W.L.S. Rodrigo of 444/C Kuda Arukgoda Alubomulla Panadura was the petitioner, he claimed Rs. 1.5 million as compensation for the violation of his Fundamental Rights.

In his application, he cited Kirulapone Police Sub-Inspector (Traffic) Imalka, Traffic OIC Rajapaksa, Wellawatta Colombo 6 Unit I Fraud Bureau OIC Vidura Jayasinghe, Kirulapone Police OIC M. Ajantha Perera, IGP and Attorney General as respondents.

The Supreme Court, however, ordered the petitioner to add Secretary of Defence Ministry as a respondent and include IGP by his name as the respondent in his application.

W. Dauaratna, instructed by Dhammika Jayatilake, appearing for the petitioner submitted to court that his client, an Air Condition Technician on 28/07/2007 at about 12:15 noon while he was driving his vehicle from Kirulapone towards Narahenpita was stopped by the first respondent Imalka at the check point at the Polhengoda Bridge and requested for his driver’s licence.

He handed over his temporary driver’s licence issued by the Commissioner of Motor Traffic and after examining it, the officers at the check point told him that it is a ‘forged licence,’ and asked for a bribe.

When he said that he did not have money, officers opened the cubby hole of the vehicle and demanded for the perfume that was inside. However, the petitioner was reluctant to hand them over the perfume.
Officers then threatened Rodrigo and informed him that his temporary driver’s licence would be thrown away after tearing it into pieces.

The petitioner had continuously attempted to convince the officers at the check point that his licence was authentic and not forged. However, at the petitioner’s insistence, the police officers had abused the petitioner in filthy words and told him to leave the place immediately.
Thereafter, the petitioner went to Kirulapone Police and informed the OIC of Kirulapone (Traffic) about the incident, OIC (Traffic) informed the victim to go back to the check point, when he came back to the check point, officers at the check point became furious and abused him in filth, and all of them went back to the police station with him.

When they reached there, he was taken to custody alleging that he used a forged licence. Then they extracted a statement from him, which was then handed over to the Fraud Bureau of Wellawatte.

He was unlawfully and illegally detained in Fraud Bureau and produced before the Magistrate on a ‘B’ report.

Meanwhile, on August 1, 2007, the third respondent informed Court that his client’s licence is a genuine one issued by Deputy Commissioner of Motor Traffic, after which the Magistrate discharged him.