{"id":301,"date":"2020-03-21T11:31:29","date_gmt":"2020-03-21T11:31:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/?page_id=301"},"modified":"2020-03-21T11:31:30","modified_gmt":"2020-03-21T11:31:30","slug":"gunawardena-v-perera-and-others","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/?page_id=301","title":{"rendered":"Gunawardena v. Perera and others"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Case Reference\/File No<\/strong> <\/td>[1983] 1 SriLR 305 <\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Case Name<\/strong> <\/td>Gunawardena v. Perera and others<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Court <\/strong> <\/td>Supreme Court <\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Date of judgement<\/strong> <\/td>25th<\/sup> and 31st<\/sup> May & 1st<\/sup>, 2nd<\/sup> and 6th<\/sup> June. 1983 <\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Judges<\/strong> <\/td>Ratwatte J
Colin-Thome J
Soza J <\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Parties<\/strong> <\/td>Petitioner <\/strong>
Gunawardena

Vs
Respondents<\/strong>

1st<\/sup> respondent \u2013 OIC, Police Station, Kollupitiya.
2nd<\/sup> respondent \u2013 Inspector General of Police <\/td><\/tr>
Keywords<\/strong> <\/td>Article 11 and 13 of the Constitution \u2013 procedure established by law for arresting and detention of persons \u2013 section 17 of the Police Ordinance, No.16 1865<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
Head note<\/strong> <\/td>\n  \n <\/td><\/tr>
Brief facts<\/strong> <\/td>The petitioner, Mrs Viviene Gunawardena, a veteran politician, was illegally arrested on 8.3.1983 and was subjected to detention and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment in violation of her fundamental rights. On the day of the arrest, the petitioner and representatives of certain other women\u2019s organization staged a demonstration displaying banners and placards opposite the American Embassy. After the demonstration the petitioner with several others walked towards Kollupitiya to go to the petitioner\u2019s house when she was arrested and the banners they had were snatched by the police. The court observed controversy on the venue that the arrest of the petitioner took place and on the versions of the parties of the alleged cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment namely throwing down the petitioner and kicking her and placing his foot on her leg when she laid fallen. The Court rejected to hold that the allegation of degrading treatment was established in light of the required high degree of probability. However, the Court held that the petitioner has been arrested illegally and the conduct of the respondents was an executive action. <\/td><\/tr>
Judicial Precedence<\/strong> <\/td>The Court held that in the event of a sharp conflict of testimony on a question of fact, the cross examination on the affidavits could be admissible. Proof to the high degree of probability required, that she had been subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by the first respondent. The responsibility casted on the petitioner in cases cruel, inhuman and degrading treatments by respondents require to establish by proof to the high degree of probability required. <\/td><\/tr>
Legislation Title<\/strong> <\/td>The Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka 1978, Police Ordinance, No.16 1865, Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No.15 of 1979 <\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Area<\/strong> <\/td>Article 11 and 13 of the Constitution; Section 17 of the Police Ordinance, No.16 1865; Section32 (1) (h) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No.15 of 1979 <\/strong> <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
Download Case File<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Case Reference\/File No [1983] 1 SriLR 305 Case Name Gunawardena v. Perera and others Court Supreme Court Date of judgement 25th and 31st May & 1st, 2nd and 6th June. 1983 Judges Ratwatte J Colin-Thome J Soza J Parties Petitioner Gunawardena VsRespondents 1st respondent \u2013 OIC, Police Station, Kollupitiya. 2nd respondent \u2013 Inspector General of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":164,"featured_media":0,"parent":254,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-301","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/301","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=301"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/301\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":303,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/301\/revisions\/303"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/254"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rightscaselaw.ibj.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=301"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}