SIRIPALA v SUB INSPECTOR WIJESINGHE AND OTHERS FR 213/2001

Facebooktwitterlinkedinrssyoutube

The petitioner in his affidavit states that he is fifty-five years old and a father of four children. Due to indigent circumstances he was dealing in illicit liquor but gave up that trade three to four months prior to the incident complained of. According to him at the time of the alleged incident he had started working as a casual labourer.
The petitioner further states that on 07.03.2001, at around 7 pm he went to the edge of the forest situated behind his house, to relieve himself. When he was attending to his ablution a man armed with a pistol grabbed him from behind and demanded illicit liquor. When the petitioner said he did not have any he was dragged towards the forest. Fearing that the man was going to kill him, the petitioner shoved the man away and tried to escape but was caught again, whereupon the petitioner bit the man ran in to the forest and hid himself.

Having carefully considered all the circumstances of this case of the view that the petitioner’s Fundamental Right guaranteed under Article 11 and 13 (2) have been violated by state officers. I therefore issue a declaration to that effect. The State is responsible for the law. The law is made for the protection of all citizens rich and
poor alike. It is therefore the duty of the State to make it’s machinery work alike for the rich and the poor. direct the State to pay the petitioner rupees fifty thousand (Rs.50,000) as compensation. The petitioner is also entitled to rupees five thousand (Rs.5000) as the cost of this application.

full judgement here

Social Sharing

Related posts