|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Tuesday, 18 May 2004 |
 |
|
 |
News | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
by Wasantha Ramanayake The special Bench of five Supreme Court Judges reserved the order in the Hokandara Murder Appeal, on May 14. The Bench comprised Justices Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, H.S. Yapa, Asoka de Silva, T.B. Weerasuriya and Nihal Jayasinghe. Counsel Rienzie Arsekuleratne PC for the fourth accused Gayan Suranga submitted that the court acquitted his client of the conspiracy charges in connection with six murders. He submitted that the court had held that he had not committed rape on Chitra Dayangani. However, he was convicted on the charge of gang rape since he was with the other accused who had committed the offence. The Counsel said that his client could not be convicted of the charge of gang rape since there had been no evidence to support either he committed the offence or aided and abetted it. He further submitted that the mere presence would not be a reason to convict him for an uncommitted offence. Solicitor General C.R. de Silva PC for the Attorney General submitted that Amaradasa, the father of the fourth accused Gayan Suranga and the members of the murdered family were sworn enemies. The members of the murdered family had filed a lawsuit against the fourth accused in connection with an assault and the case had been called in the morning on the fateful day. The fourth accused also had attended the court and returned. The SG submitted in that context the fourth respondent Gayan Suranga's visit to the house of his sworn enemy from the back door was very significant. "Here is a man bringing cigarettes to his father's servant, Ukkuwa, the first respondent, who was in the deceased's house. He had witnessed Lalanadasa's body was inside the paddy box and one of his daughter's body was lying flat close to the toilet. On his next visit he sees two more bodies. He also witnessed the three accused raping the other daughter whose hands and legs were stretched and tied. He himself expressed his desire to "rape" the girl. The SG queried as to why the fourth respondent did not venture to stop the process of carnage when he had complete hold over Ukkuwa his father's servant, the first accused. The SG submitted that the very presence of Gayan Suranga was encouraging the rest who were involved in the butchery. "If he had wanted to, he could have stopped the process and even could have saved the life of the girl who was alive at that time and her brother who was later killed. But, he had not." Although the trial Judges acquitted Gayan Suranga of the conspiracy charges in connection with the six murders, mainly based on the evidence given by the witness Jayantha alias Jonty, had they considered the circumstantial evidences it could have been proved otherwise. The SG referred to Gayan as the second architect of the carnage and his father Amaradasa as the first. He submitted that Amaradasa's body was found on the premises of the house and his death could not be explained. Accused-appellants H.E. Menaka Sanjeewa, K.J.S. Sri Nandana, S.A. Mahinda Siriwardane and H.P. Gayan Suranga cited the Attorney General as the respondent. They appealed against the conviction and the death sentence by the Trial-at-Bar dated November 17, 2000. The accused were found guilty of committing the murders on six persons of the same family i.e the father, mother, three daughters and the son on February 10, 1999 and were further sentenced to a total of 30 years RI on the counts of robbery and gang rape. Shyamal Collure appeared for the first accused. Gayan Perera with Prabha Perera appeared for the second and third accused. Rienzie Arsekuleratne PC appeared for the fourth respondent. Solicitor General C.R. de Silva PC, Senior State Counsel Sarath Jayamanna and State Counsel Ms. Harippriya Jayasundara appeared for the Attorney General. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
