GALLELAW BLOGGER

Parental love for a daughter transcends words, embodying a profound and unconditional bond that words can scarcely capture. Head Note: Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka  Case No: CA/HCC/0234/2023  Accused-Appellant: Ambagahage Nihal Ranjith Emmanuwel  Complainant-Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General   Summary: The appellant, Ambagahage Nihal Ranjith Emmanuwel, was indicted in the High Court of Puttalam for committing the offence of rape on his own daughter, an offence punishable under section 364(3) of the Penal Code. The incidents occurred between January and May 2014 while the victim was under the care of her father, following her mother's departure for overseas employment.   After a trial, the High Court found the appellant guilty as charged and sentenced him to 19 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 25,000/-. The appellant challenged the conviction and sentence on several grounds, including the fai...

  Summary of the Judgment: This judgment of the Court of Appeal relates to an appeal filed by Dasanayakalage Karunaratne alias David Singno against the Competent Authority, Plantation Management Monitoring Division. The case involves the recovery of possession of a state land. The Appellant had initially filed a revision application in the High Court of Ratnapura, which was dismissed, leading to this appeal. Legal Matters Discussed: 1. Recovery of State Land: The primary legal issue is the recovery of possession of state land as per the State Lands (Recovery of Possession) Act No. 7 of 1979. 2. Notice to Quit: The Appellant contested the notice to quit. 3. Validity of Deeds: The Appellant argued that the deeds in favor of his possession were not considered. 4. Jurisdiction of Magistrate: The legality of the Magistrate's decision to eject the Appellant from the land without validating his claims to possession was questioned. 5. Revisionary Jurisdiction: The appeal invo...

CLICK TO ACCESS CPC

786  Head Note: This revision application was filed in the Court of Appeal under Section 364 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979, seeking to set aside the orders of the High Court of Colombo in case No. HC 6131/2012. The primary legal issues addressed were the abduction and presumption of death of the accused. It also considered the principle of "abatement ab initio," and whether trial proceedings could continue in the absence of the accused.       Legal Points Discussed: 1. Abduction and Presumption of Death: The accused, Welaudan Methiyas Chandrapala alias Mervyn, was abducted from prison custody and not heard of for over a year. The Court addressed the issuance of a death certificate under the Registration of Deaths and Missing Persons (Special Provisions) Act, No. 19 of 2010, after which the case was abated.   2. Abatement of Criminal Proceedings: It was argued that under the principle of "abatement ab initio," criminal proceedin...

  786  Headnote: Jagath Premalal Senanayake v. Attorney General  Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka  CA/HCC/0166/2016  Decided on: 13th September 2024  Court: Court of Appeal  Judges: Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.; P. Kumararatnam, J.   Facts:  Jagath Premalal Senanayake, the accused-appellant, was indicted for the murder of two individuals, Madarasinhage Chandrawathi and Madarasinhage Padmawathi, on or about August 22, 2008, an offense punishable under Section 296 of the Penal Code. After a jury trial, the High Court convicted him of murder and sentenced him to death. The appellant challenged the conviction and sentence, raising multiple grounds of appeal, including procedural irregularities, errors in jury direction, and misapplication of law regarding the evidence.   Held:  The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonab...

Head note: Ganegamage Sarath Samarajeeva and Kirinde Dissanayake Indra Kumari v. Attorney General  CA/HCC/16/2018  Decided on: 11th September 2024  Court: Court of Appeal  Judges: Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.; P. Kumararatnam, J.   Facts:  The accused-appellants, Sarath Samarajeeva and Indra Kumari, were convicted by the High Court of Balapitiya for grievous hurt under Section 317 of the Penal Code for throwing acid at Withanachchi Gunawardena Siriyalatha (PW1) in November 2006. The appellants were sentenced to 7 ½ years of rigorous imprisonment, fined, and ordered to pay compensation to the victim. They appealed against the conviction, based on the grounds of discrepancies in the identification and reliability of evidence.   Background of the Case:  The incident occurred in 2006 when PW1, who lived with her husband, had a dispute with the accused-appellants, who were tenants in a house owned by PW1’s husband. The dispute arose o...