SC orders Acting IGP & three others to pay Rs 2 Mn as compensation to torture victim

The Supreme Court today ordered four police officers including the Acting Inspector General of Police (IGP) Deshabandu Tennakoon to pay Rs 500,000 each as compensation to an individual who was arrested illegally and subjected to torture while in police custody. 

Delivering the judgement over a Fundamental Rights petition filed by a former military officer, the Court also directed the National Police Commission and other relevant authorities to take appropriate disciplinary action against the officers found to be responsible for the torture and ill-treatment of the suspect. 

The torture victim, a retired military soldier was arrested by police officers under the suspicion of robbery incidents in Padukka area on December 17, 2010, and was subjected to torture continuously until he was produced before a Magistrate court. 

The Court found that the victim- Weheragedara Ranjith Sumangala of Kindelpitiya, Millewa was subjected to severe torture by the police officers who reported to the then Superintendent of Police (SSP) Thennakoon who was attached to Nugegoda Division and even tortured him at his residence in front of his family as well during police custody. 

Accordingly, along with the Acting IGP, a police officer named  Bandara, Inspector Bhathiya Jayasinghe, Egodawele, Chief Inspector and Head Quarters’ Inspector, attached to Mirihana Police Station were found responsible for the ill-treatment and torture experienced by the victim.

The State is also ordered to pay a compensation amount of Rs. 100,000 out of the funds allocated to the Police Department, given the institutional issues observed by the three-judge bench. 

The affidavit filed by the petitioner also stressed that the 5th Respondent - then SSP Thennakoon - himself beat the Petitioner with a ‘three-wheel rubber band’ after stripping him naked and ordering him to rub Siddhalepa on his genitalia. “The 5th Respondent is specifically referred to therein by his name and rank, as it was then,”

The Court also noted that no material has been produced before the Court by the 5th Respondent to distance himself from such violations.

“I am of the view that supervising officers are to be directly held liable for the conduct of their subordinates in appropriate instances, even in the absence of direct participation. Supervising officers can be held liable where there is affirmatory participation or participatory presence on the part of such supervising officers; or, where they have, directly or indirectly, implemented or enabled unconstitutional policies by turning a blind eye towards unconstitutional practices directly under their authority,” Justice S. Thurairaja observed. 

The bench consists of Justice S. Thurairaja, Justice Kumudini Wickremasinghe, and Justice Priyantha Fernando.