SC orders Police Commission to take disciplinary action against Deshabandu

For  violating Fundamental Rights of an individual while being detained

• SC notes several inconsistencies in respondents’ narration of events in the case
• State directed to pay Rs.100,000 compensation 

By Lakmal Sooriyagoda  

The Supreme Court yesterday ordered the National Police  Commission (NPC) and other relevant authorities to take appropriate  disciplinary action against newly appointed Acting IGP Deshabandu  Tennakoon and two other police officers since they are responsible for  violating Fundamental Rights of an individual while being detained at  the Mirihana Police Station in 2010. 

 Meanwhile, the Supreme Court ordered Acting IGP Deshabandu  Tennakoon and three others including two police officers to pay a  compensation of Rs. 2 million out of their personal funds to the  petitioner, a former army soldier. Each respondent was ordered to pay a  compensation of Rs.500,000 to the petitioner within six months from the  date of judgement.   
The judgement was delivered by Justice S. Thurairaja with Justices Kumudini Wickremasinghe and Priyantha Fernando agreeing.  

The Supreme Court held that respondents including Acting  IGP Deshabandu Tennakoon have violated the fundamental rights of  petitioner W. Ranjith Sumangala by his illegal arrest, detention and  subjection to torture at the Mirihana Police Station, which was under  the supervision of Deshabandu Tennakoon.  

A private party, fourth respondent Ajith Wanasundera (a  retired Sergeant Major of the Army) who was involved in the matter was  also held liable and required to pay compensation. The State was  directed to pay a compensation of Rs.100,000 to the petitioner.  

In cases of this nature, where the violations are grave,  while the State must absolutely take responsibility, I do not see it  sufficient to merely impose the liability on the State. I do not see it  just and equitable to impose upon the taxpayer the burden of  compensating for the transgressions of errant officials. Having borne  the burden of their earnings over the years, must the taxpayer  compensate for their misdeeds as well?, Justice Thurairaja questioned.  

An affidavit had been filed before court to support that  Deshabandu Tennakoon, then a Superintendent of Police, had paid a visit  to the place where the Petitioner and several others were detained on December 17, 2010. The affidavit further states that Tennakoon himself  beat the Petitioner with a ‘three-wheel rubber band’ after stripping him  naked and ordering him to rub Siddhalepa on his genitalia.   “I find the 5th Respondent Tennakoon to have tortured the  Petitioner in violation of his fundamental rights guaranteed under  Article 11 of the Constitution. For this very reason, and by the very  fact, I find the 5th Respondent to have further violated the  Petitioner’s rights under Article 12(1) of the Constitution,” Justice  Thurairaja added.    The Supreme Court held that upon the  perusal of the evidence presented to the Court by the parties, there  appear to be several inconsistencies with the respondents’ narration of  the incidents of this case.  

The Petitioner was then taken to the Dambara Cemetery and  was questioned by the Respondents about one Chinthaka. The 2nd  Respondent Inspector Bhathiya questioned the Petitioner whether he had  retained his gun from the military .The 2nd Respondent had threatened the Petitioner that he  would bury the Petitioner alive in the cemetery, causing the Petitioner  to fear for his life.