{"id":271,"date":"2020-03-19T12:44:28","date_gmt":"2020-03-19T12:44:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/?page_id=271"},"modified":"2020-03-19T12:44:32","modified_gmt":"2020-03-19T12:44:32","slug":"nallanayagam-v-gunatilake-and-others","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/?page_id=271","title":{"rendered":"Nallanayagam v. Gunatilake and others"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Case Reference\/File No<\/strong> <\/td>[1987] 1 SriLR 293<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Case Name<\/strong> <\/td>Nallanayagam v. Gunatilake and others<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Court <\/strong> <\/td>Supreme Court <\/td><\/tr>
Date of judgement<\/strong> <\/td>24th<\/sup> and 25th<\/sup> July 1985<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Judges<\/strong> <\/td>Wanasundera J
Colin-Thome J
Atukorale J <\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Parties<\/strong> <\/td>Petitioner<\/strong>
Nallanayagam

Vs

Respondents<\/strong>

1st<\/sup> respondent \u2013 Gunatilake
2nd<\/sup> respondent \u2013H.L. Piyasena, Co-ordinating Officer
3rd<\/sup> respondent – De Crusz, Assistant Superintendent of Police, Kalmunai
4th<\/sup> respondent \u2013 Kumarasamy Krishnadasan, Headquarters Inspector, Police Station, Batticoloa. <\/td><\/tr>
Keywords<\/strong> <\/td>Articles 13(1),(2) and (4) of the Constitution \u2013 charge of spreading rumors of the Government \u2013 Regulations 19(1) and (2) of Emergency Regulations<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Head note<\/strong> <\/td>\n  \n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Brief\n facts<\/strong>\n <\/td>The petitioner was arrested at his home on 22.05.1985 without being informed the reasons for such arrest. He was told however that the 2nd<\/sup> respondent wanted him at the police station Batticaloa. The next day he was brought to the Criminal Investigation Department and his statement was recorded and was informed that he was being investigated on a charge of spreading false information and bringing the government into disrepute. Thereafter the petitioner was kept in custody at the police station, Slave Island. The petitioner seeks relief from the court for alleged infringements of Articles 13(1), (2) and (4) of the Constitution. It was contented that the petitioner was produced before a Magistrate only after three days from the thirty days after his arrest going against proviso to Regulation 19 (1) of Emergency Regulations. In light of the \u2018procedure established by law\u2019 under Article 13(1) of the Constitution, to be read with the proviso being regulation 19 (1) of Emergency Regulations, the Court held that fundamental rights of the petitioner protected under Article 13(1) and (2) of the Constitution have been violated. <\/td><\/tr>
Judicial Precedence<\/strong> <\/td>The Court was of the view that Article 13(2) postulates a salutary principle safeguarding the life and liberty of the suspect and must exactly be complied with by the Executive. The provision cannot be overlooked or dismissed as of little consequence or as a minor matter. <\/td><\/tr>
Legislation Title<\/strong> <\/td>The Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka 1978 <\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Area<\/strong> <\/td>Articles 13(1),(2) and (4) of the Constitution; Regulations 19 (1) and (2) of Emergency Regulations<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Download Case File<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Case Reference\/File No [1987] 1 SriLR 293 Case Name Nallanayagam v. Gunatilake and others Court Supreme Court Date of judgement 24th and 25th July 1985 Judges Wanasundera J Colin-Thome J Atukorale J Parties Petitioner Nallanayagam Vs Respondents 1st respondent \u2013 Gunatilake 2nd respondent \u2013H.L. Piyasena, Co-ordinating Officer 3rd respondent – De Crusz, Assistant Superintendent of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":164,"featured_media":0,"parent":248,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-271","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/271","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/164"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=271"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/271\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":274,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/271\/revisions\/274"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/248"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}