|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Wednesday, 31 December 2003 |
 |
|
 |
News | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
The Court of Appeal yesterday refused an application for anticipatory bail application filed by the Chairman of Sri Lanka Telecom and Sri Lanka Cricket Tilanga Sumatipala. He is due to appear before the Chief Magistrate of Colombo on January 8, 2004. The Bench comprised Justices N. Udalagama and P. Wijerathne. The Court informed that it will state the reasons for the refusal on January 16, 2004. In this application the petitioner, Tilanga Sumathipala has cited Director General (CID) and the Attorney General as respondents. Counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Ranjith Fernando submitted that the petitioner holds important positions in society and that wide publicity was given to a false confession made by an underworld figure in an English weekly. The CID has submitted a B report under the Immigration and Emigration Act to the Colombo Chief Magistrate and CID requested the Magistrate to issue either notices or an arrest warrant against his client. The Counsel further submitted that the Magistrate declining the request, had informed the CID to produce the petitioner if there is sufficient evidence against him. The petitioner was due to appear before the Magistrate's Court to face charges framed against him on January 8, 2004. According to the Counsel, petitioner was accused of adding and abetting an underworld figure by the name of Dammika Amerasinghe to fly to U.K to watch a cricket tournament in violation of the immigration and Emigration Act. Counsel further submitted that the CID should have concrete evidence such as forged passport, Visa and disembarkation forms to prove the allegation. He said when charged under the Immigration and Emigration Act, it was difficulty to obtain bail. He stated in such an instance the Court of Appeal has inherent jurisdictions under the Section 404 and 7 of the Penal Code to grant bail. State Counsel Priyantha Nawana stated although the Court of Appeal could grant bail to a suspect under Section 404 and 7 of the Penal Code , it has no jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail to a suspect ,expected to be taken into remand custody. He further submitted that the accused in this case had through a fundamental Rights application sought to evade his being taken into custody. However the application was rejected by the Court of Appeal and the accused was directed back to the Magistrate's Court. He further submitted that what the petitioner expected from this application was to obtain an anticipatory bail from this Court. State Counsel Priyantha Nawana stated that there is no legal provision whereby the Court of Appeal could grant anticipatory bail. The Court refused and put off hearing for January 8, 2004 to state reason for the refusal. Dulip Jayakody, A. Seneviratne and Priyantha Nawana appeared for the Attorney General while Counsel Dr. Ranjith Fernando with Sampath de Zoysa, Kolitha Dharmawardena instructed by A.N.P. Amunugama appeared for the petitioner Tilanga Sumathipala. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
