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. At this junction on the orders of the 2nd respondent the petitioner was taken into custody by army personnel and put into a jeep. The petitioner was not informed of the charge nor given the reasons for his arrest. The’2nd respondent told the army and police officers that they could take petitioner and do as they like with him and left the place. in consequence of what the 2nd respondent said the petitioner was then put on the floor of the truck and subjected to torture and/or cruel, inhuman and/or discriminatory treat.
On the face of this material, I do not think that the alleged acts of torture and ill-treatment administered by army personnel has
been made out or could be imputed as a liability of the State as a matter of law. The alleged acts have not been authorised, encouraged, or countenanced or performed for the benefit of the State. The material before us shows that they would also not have been tolerated by the authorities, and redress in all probability granted if there had been a genuine complaint. In these circumstances I am of the view that no legal liability under the constitutional provisions can be imputed to the State. and also take a decision to dismiss the case by court.
