IN 'I'll E COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCl{ATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF

Court of App"al Case No. CA BAL 30/2019 CA BAL 31/2019 CA Bt\L32/2019

Magis ...... e Cour. of Walaslllulla Case No. BR

256121119

SRI LANKA

Head Quarlers I nspeclor,

Police Sial ion.

Walasl11ulla .

Co mplainant

v .

I. Chaminda Egodage

2. Kattadige Alllila Gayan

1. Knlladige .IatlClka Pushpak lltnar; ,

Suspect's

AND NOW BETWEEN

I. Cilaminda Egodage (CA BAL 30/19 )

2. Kattadige Amila Gayan (CA BAL 31/ 19)

3. Kattadige lanoka Pusllpakumara (C A BA L 3:YI9)

Suspect Petitioners

v.

I. Head Quarters Inspector,

Police Station,

Wa lasmulla.

Complainant Respondent

2. Hon. Attorney General,

Attorney General's Depal1menl,

Colombo 12.

Respondent

1

COUNSEL

ARGUEDON

ORDER ON

1\:, I'KIYANTIIA FERNANDO ,J,

ACIIAI ,A WENGAPPUI.I. 1.

K, PRIY ANTHA FERNANDO J,

Himali Kularathna for the Suspect Petitioners,

C. J. Mahawaduge SC for the Respondent.

11 ,03 ,2020

26 ,05,2020

UI. P~titiollers Chumindu Egoduge, K, Ami/" Gayan, and K l,,"aka Pushpakumara have

made separate applications for bail, by their applications No, BAL 30/19, BAL 31119

and llAL 32119 respectively , As they all are remanded in the same case in

Magistrate' s Court, Walasmulla (Case No, BR 256119), all three applications were

taken up for inquiry on the same day, Same facts with regard to the alleged incident

referred to in case No, BR 256/19 would apply to all three applications, Therefore, this

'!I l k ! i .... 11 1, ll k \, 11 ,dl lll rL',: ;qlp l il'.ll ii1[b, IH)\\I.:\.:r, thl' l· .\(l: ~ liun<1II.· l rL unl ::. 1JI I L"'': ~ urgl:J b)

each Petitioner will be considered separately when bail is considered on each Petitioner.

Facts in brief

02, As lacts reported before the Magistrate' s Court, Walasmulla, the Petitioner in the instant

app lication No, BAt. 32/2019 lanaka Pusupakumara, has allegedly kidnapped and raped

the victim child named Madushani Kaushalya, The complaint had been made on

06 ,01.2019, Police had been looking for the suspect lanaka who had been evading

arrest. In the meantime, lanaka 's brother by the name of Ami/a Gayan (Petitioner in BR

31 /2019) and his friend Chami/a Godage (Petitioner in BR 30/2019) with others had

gone to the Madushani Kaushalya's house in the night on 13,04,2019 and had assaulted

her father.

2

l:~ III "'L'd llliSl:ilil:r to 1111: hllll-';L' II t1 ld itl: 1lls ~ lIld had threatened to withdraw the clllllp la illl o r

1;11 11..' alld /"idtlilppill g, Ma llL' r had hl:en reported to the po lice (he same day and i.I Illobil ~

pl11111 L' alld ;1 h~ hll ~ 1 IL'li al Ihl: SCellt.' by th l! suspec ts had been handed Over tll (h~ polict.' .

Policc abll had rccovered a piece o f c loth soaked with blood and a pole ti'olll th~ l: rillll!

Sl:e nc.

0.1. This incident had been rerorted to the Magistrate's Court with refercnce tl1<l1 the suspects

had cO llllllil lL'd <In olli.: lll:c punishable inl e!"ms o f the Assistance to <Ind Protection of Victim s

"f('rililo ami Willle"os Ael No . 4 o f cO IS (Iho Act).

(I~ . S' ''peci .. lllI il" (;"1'<111 had bee ll produced before Ihe learned Mag islrale on fS .()4 .2()19 and

( 'htli llil/rllI I:~!.!(}( I(/g{' O il 04 .07.:!O I q and Wl!rc rCIlHll1<.kd . ./ufluku PlIshpaklllll { l/'(/ had l1l.::ell

prlldlll:J..:d h~ lim..: Ihc karn~d Magislf<lte 0 11 03.05.2019 <llld was remandcd .

(I S. IlIl erllls "fseelioll 10(1) oflhe Ad, no suspeci or such olYe nce shall be enlarged on bail,

1I1lh..: -.;s ulHkr cxceptio na l c ircuillstances by the Courl of Appeal. Thereto!"!.!, the Pct itioners

ha \,o,,: iIl VO h. L'd (hc j urisdiction of this Co urt for co ns idem tion of granting bail.

(J() . F.\:ce ptiollal Cirn ll llstunces Illay vary fro m case to case. Our superior Co urts ha ve disclissed

V \~~' l'l i~HI , d \,: ill.."lI11hlall cl..· ... Itl ~r; lll l hai l. 1.:\1L'lhi\L' l j ill bail pC lld ill ~ appeal ,lppl iGHill ll ... .

Long period o f illl.:an.;cration and ill hea lth have been considered as exceptional in some

ca~L·S .

07 . Inlhe ease 0 1· Til e Qlleell , V, CIJmelisSilvlI 74 N.LR, 113, it was he ld thai grounds whieh

\\u llid be CO lll1110 n to very l11any Accused perso ns would not be conside red exce plional.

C(lu rt said:

I do nol think Ihe circumstances urged are suilicient 10 muke the

I,elitioner's case an exceplional one. The fir.\'! of Ihese reu.WJ!1s bears

examination while Ihe difficulty envisaged in the second ground is by no

means extraordinQlY as it is one which would be common 10 velY many

LlcL'used persons . ..

3

IIX . I kliCe. eirelllll'!:I1" '" , "",""<>,,111 ,,11m very many Acc used perso ns including Ilteir per,,, n,,1

h "' II ~'" 111;11 IIla ~ Ix: CO II II llll II 10 lIlany willnol be cU I1 ~id~r~d e.\ lraordinary .

O{J. When cOlIsitk ring whether the grounds urged are except iona l, it is incli mben t upon the

CO LIn In la k~ the objectives orthe Act also into consideration. Main objective among others

uf lll\.: Act i ~ to pl"l)vid~ lor a mechanism to promote, protect, enlon.:e and exen.:isc th~ rigili s

or vil:l ill1 ~ . Also. hI provide assistance and protection to victims of crime and witnesses. An

L' Il Vi rlllllllL'1l1 has 10 estab lish for the victim and the witnesses to come and testily in Court

\\ illl(1 111 any kar.

III \\ 11I1 Il;I\III ~ Il h.: ,!l l\l\ L'- llh:lllioJIi.:d judil'ial,m .. ·ceLicll[-; and prilh.: ipk ... ill 11I 111d . I \\ill 11\ 1\\

1'IHI" idl..'I" " ,hetlll..'!" the gn.l ll lH.ls urged by the n.:spet:tive Petitiuners art' t'.'\t:~ptjonal.

11 . i'L'li l i(lIlL'r ( '/tflll/i IlU I'."gut/flge in app lica tion No. 111\1 . 30/~019, prc!clTL'd tilL' I(lilowing

L'n )lItHI..; a .... L'\CL'pt iOlla l to grallt hail.

;1) I IlL' P~titi()ll~r c<l ll.!gorica lly denies that he has cOl1l mitted an olkncl: punishable

ulllkr I h~ Assistance 10 and Protection ofVicl ims of Cr ime and Witness At.:t No. 04

lIr~()I :i.

h) Tile learlled Magistrate has failed to spec ify a lega l basis on which the Petitioner was

1\: 1ll:11Hkd :llItI L·fl lli illlIPll o;;; l:' iIH . .' :Jn.'cra ll'o.

c) The Iearncd Mag islrale has failed to cons ider the submissions made by Ihe counse l ai'

tht.: Petitioll!..:!" concern ing the issue of bail.

d I The invesl igal iOl1 inl o this alleged offence had long been co ncluded and the

Pel il ioner has been in remand concerning this case for abo ut 06 months. The matter

is In be rererred for advice to the Honourable Attorney Gene ral.

el The Pelilioner is the so le breadwinner of the family with three children aged 16

years, ~ years and 5 years and was working at a garage who lived in poverty al Ihe

lime o r Itis arrest. The family of the Petitioner is undergoing severe hardshi p due to

his continuous incarceration.

4

n rhe Pelilioller is reee ivillg Illetiieallreatmenl while in rema lld .

gJ !"here are 110 pn.:violls co nvic tiulls o r pending cases agai nst the Peti tioner.

12. NOlle o rlhosl' grou nds urgl!d are except ional to grant bail tor the lo llmving reaso ns. Learned

co ull se l IlH· the Appellant submitted that the Petitioner denies the allegation. Further. cO lillse l

SUblllill L'd tlwl a lthllugh till.! I'ditioner nttended a party in n'ont ur Ibe c() l11pli.linLln' ·s house

across [he road Ih ,1\ was held ill an abandoned hOll se. no stich incidl'1l1 took place as

L'OJl lpla illl'd .

13, Il u\\!".'\ CL thL' pillice have n.:po rt eu to the Magist ra te's CO LIrl Ilwl they received a helmet and

:1 lIl\dllk' plllllll' k:1i h) th L' .... 1I ..,pl..\.:\'-; :l1 [ lie c rillh. .. ' SCC II L'. I"urthcr. pn li cL' 11,1\ 1,." rl'L\ l\l' l"l'd a pllk­

and a hlood-slailll'd piece or cloth at the scene. Hell l:e, it is a maller tin the Trial Court to

dL'l.:i<iL' \\,hI.'Ihef Ihne is surlicienl ev idence against the suspects.

I I Iii" al ' ,11 IIq!l'd lil:11 I hI...' k'ill"IlL'd Magistr:11L.' II<IS [;Iiled 10 ", pl'eil )' lil l.' kg:! I h;hi" Illl \\!liL'lllhl'

[1L'liliII11l.:r \Vas 1\.' IlI:1IH.k'd. t\ s I Illentioned bc f(Jre in paragraph 05, ill terms orseclio ll 10 o r

tilL' /\1...'1. jilrisdictilllllll grant hai l to a persa ll slispel:ted oran oftenl:!.! ull(.kr Ihl.: sections X or

l) "rl he i\el is vested o nly wilh the Co urt of Appeal in excepl ional c irculllstallees.

I) . t\ lIhll ll g li . il is urged that the sllspect is rece iving medica l treatment at the remand priso ll.

tll L' r!...' is 111l Illedical n:po rt submitted about his sickness. T here is no ev idence 10 conc lude

111.11 III i~· klll ·"·' It" ; III~ . (; II IIIt)1 hI...' II\:;rlL'd ill tlrl' pri" llll 1r1)"pil :1I111" :11 1.\ 11[1r~'I" :;11 \l'nllll~·1I1

hosp ital. and that the sickness ca n be aggravated if the suspect continues to be incarcerated .

I (l. Tile sus pec t beillg Ihe so k bread w inner of the family and the fact that he is marr ied wilh

tlrn:c l ' hildn.' 11 an: not exceptional to grant ba il. Those factors are COlll lllon to very many

slispeds w ho are ill remand and 110 Illeans are extra ord inary, and therefore Ilot exceptiomt l

to grant bail. Subm iss ion of the learned counsel that the suspect has no previous co nv ictions

ami pending cases and the period in remand cannot be taken into account ftS exceptiona l

eirc lIlli sl allcL's. As lire suspect has tai led to adduce exceptiona l c irculll stances. wh ich \voulcl

be Ihe ollly basis 10 warrallt the granting of bail, application for bail is refused.

17. Pelil iOller K. AI1Ii/u Guyan in application No. BAL 3 1/2 019, preferred the ta llowi ng grou nds

as exc~pt io llal to grant bail.

5

:1) ' ·hl· P~l iti () ll l' r c; ll l'gt1rie; II' y d~llil!'s that he has cO lllmitted an nlh.· llc ..... punisllabk'

UJltll'!" tile A .... si"I;III Cl· tu :llld I )ro t ~c liu n u rVi ctillls o l" Crill1c and Wil ll ..... :-.s ACI No . ()~

()r~l)ls.

h) Thl! kmned Mag istrate has failed to spec ify a lega l basis on which Ihe Petitioner was

r~lllall(kd anti cO lltillllous ly illcarce rated.

e) rhl! karnt'd Magistrat e has failed to co ns ide r the submiss ions made hy tlh .. ' co ullsel of

Ih ..... P ..... titiolll:r co m.:ernin g the issue o f bail.

d) Ilh,: IlI\l· .... l i.:...';l l illll il ll \! IlI i .... alk'g.l'd o lh:llu.: had IUlig hl'l'll Ltllll"lud~.:d IIlId IlIl'

P ..... I il iOlll' r has lx:t: n ill remand concernin g this case fl.u· Clbout 06 mOllths. Th ..... nHllt ..... r

i .... 10 Ix.- rd~r red Illi' advice 10 the Iionourabk Attorney (ienera !.

l' ) I Ill' 1\'111 illller i:-. Ih~ so k: hn:adwiIlIH.: r u r th e...: 1:II11ily with lIlie child aged 4 year~ ami

\\;IS :l IIlr .......... -w heckr driver who lived ill poverty at the time o f his arrest. The 1:11l1 ily

ur th ..... 1)L'l it itl iler is und ergo ing severe hardship due to his co nt illtlolls im:an:t: rat iUIl .

n The Pet it iu ner is rece iving l1ledicallrea tmenl while ill remand.

<II Tl1 l, I ..... , ;1I·l' 1\11 prl'v itl il " I.'n ll \' il'tio ll" a ~a ill " t til l' r~t;tiolle r

I X. I his I\:tilion~r Allli/u Guyon has submitted the same grounds as the Petitioner Chumindu

I::"",{ug<, in applica lio n No. BAL 30120 19. The o nly difference is thai he is Ihe falher orone

ch ild .

1'1. i\lthllul',h. il is suhlllill ed on behalfofthe Petitione r, that he has no prev ious conviclions o r

pc nd ing cases. il was submitted by the Respondent that the Petitioner had a s imilar case

against hilll ill the Wa lasillulia Mag istrate 's Co urt in Case No. 37505, where he is charged

Ii, r CO llllllilling otknces punisha ble under sections 403, 486, 343 and 410 of the Pe na l Code.

II is also suhmill ed in the affidavit filed by Sub Inspecto r G.P. Gunmen" to r the

!{I,..'SPO lltiL'1l1. that this case had been compounded with the consent of the parties. However.

tll ~ t11ct that the suspect has no previo lls convictions, alone, cannot be tak en as an

6

L'\CL'pli(l nal CirCUlllSlaJlCL' 10 g r:ulI bail. I knee, fo r the sallle reaso llS lIl~nlinned b\ IIlC in

p<lragraplb 12 III I (). ilpplic;1l ion hn' bail urthe Petitiuner is r~ru sed .

20. rile Susp~C I - I'd it ioner KU/fuJigl! .lanoka Pushpak lll11ClI"u (CA BAL 3212 019). in 11 is P~t iriun

ha s urgcd the 1{) llo wing as exceptional c ircumstances to be considered in granting bail.

a) rhc Pl: litioll~ r ca tl!gorica lly denies that he has c0 1ll111ill l!d an ll n i.: n c~ punishab le

11l1liL'r th~ Ass istalH..:e to :Ind Protectio n of Victims of Crillle and WitnL'ss Act No. 04

o r 2()1 5.

h) I'he 1L'; l rn~d Ma gistra te has nliled to spec ity a legal bas is 0 11 which till' Pcl it iOIlL'r was

1 ... : ll1;ltllk·d :llld L"\ 11 II II IlIIlllS I) illc; II\:c ralcd .

L') I'he kal"l1~d Magistra k has fllilcd 10 cO lls i(kr thL' suhmiss ions InadL' h~ the C\IU llsc lllf

tilL' PL' t iliollL"I" concernin g. the issue o rbail.

tI ) Th~ in vest igation int o this a llegl!ci o ne- nee had long bl!c n cllnc lmkd and the

PL'l iti lllle r has been ill remand cO IH,.:e rnin g this case tin about 06 months. The malt er

is III hc rckrred Illr advico to tho Honourable Attorney Ge neral.

\.,' ) I he I)e l ililliler is Ihl! so lt: breadwinner of the family with one child agt'd 8 years and

\\ ; I '~ : 1 111 :1,\111 \\hll li\L'd i ll pll\ LTt .\ ; 11 tilL' tilll L' or ili " :IITL· .... I \'111.: 1:llllih 1\ 1' Ih l:

Pt: litioller is undergo ing severe hardship due to his continllous incarceration.

n Iho Pclili"nor is rece iv in g medica l treatme nt whi le in remallCl.

g. ) There are 11 0 previous convictions aga inst the Petitioner.

~ I . 1')L' t il iom:r ./ul1dko /JlIshpakllnwra (Petitioner in BAL 32/2019) is the main suspect in the

subslall l ive case o l"kidnapp ing and rape in case No . BR 10/2019. He denies any involvement

illlhc illl: idcllt a lleged 10 have occ urred on 13.04.20 19, where he is suspected oflhreatening

"illlo,ses in case No. 10/2019. Co unse l for the Petitioner submitted that Ihe Petitioner did

nul knllW abou l any in c ident reported in case No. 10/2019. However. Po lice have reported

thai Ihe Petilioner had bee n evading arrest and that the a lleged incidenl in case No. BR

25611 9 had takon place whilst the Petitioner was evading arrest in the substan ti ve case . On

7

1111,: \,.'\ Hklll..: L' pl:H.;l..'d hL'l il t'C hilll , il is I(H lh~ learned Trial Judge to ck c idc ",1!t.:lhL'r IhLTt.' i..,

\.'\ likll\,.·\,.' ; 1 ~; llIh! rilL' 1'l:1 II lo Ol' 1 10 lilld hilll guihy.

(U UII"L" li ll' lhe 1\:l ilio l1 t: 1' SUllillilt t:d Ihal the Petition!!r has no prev ioliS l:Onvil..: IIOIlS or

pL' nd ing casL.'S, l-Io\\'\!vL.' r. il is slIhmill cd ill his affida v it by Sub Inspec tor G,P, AheYlI 'ikrul11u

Illal Ille Petitioner whilst evading arrest in the substantive matter has allegedly alll!lllpted 10

~idllap the viclim child again and 111<11 there is a se parate case pending ag<linst the Petilioner

ill L:<I."t: No. IlR ~l)~/:2 019 . III his t:o untcro~jeclioIlS Petilioner has no t denit.'d Iht' above. This

\\tluld o\L'ITidL' illl n thL' I' grtl llilds urged by the Petitioner as exceptiollal cin,:u lllsIHIH.:es.

11 1\\\\,.'\\,.'1 . :11\ \l11l\,.'1 ~rllulld s \\hid\ arc si lililar 10 that \\CI"i..! urgl.!d b) thl.! \..\tl1l..'1' SliSPL.'(\.

, \' 111 II 111\.' 1..., ,I'> IIll'lll ;II IIL't! hl..'l i In.: ill I II j" Il rdn , do Illlt \\ :trr:lIll the l!r: lnl ill l! (l r h:1 i I. I !cIlC\,.'. :I"

t ll\,.' " \,.' 1 II IP III..' I ha :-. I:ll k:d tll adduce e,\l.;e pt io ll"l l.; irt: ulll s lalll:~S to W:'IITi.lllt th~ grallt lng 0 1' 11<111,

h ; 1 il j..., 1'\..'I ·u .... cd .

Ilh: rl'l in\'. thl' applit:a liolls I()f hail I(),. Ihe Petitioners in all three ilpplil.::llioll .... (HAL

;lIl c lll'I . II"I . 31 /2 111'1 , 11"1. 321201'i) are rc hlseL! .

JU()GE OF THE COURT OF AI'PF.AL

I\CII,\I.A WEN(;AI'I'ULI,.J

, agrL.'c .

JUDGE OF THE COURT OF APPEAL

8