Posts

RECOVERY OF STATE LAND AND REVISION

Image
  ASOKA SAMAN KUMARA JAYALATH v. POLPITIGE MARY NELKA PERERA Court of Appeal – CA/PHC/0155/2019 – Decided on 24 October 2025 - Before: K. M. S. Dissanayake, J., and D. Thotawatta, J. State Land (Recovery of Possession) Act No. 7 of 1979 (as amended) Sections 5, 10(1) and 10(2) – High Court of the Provinces (Special Provisions) Act No. 19 of 1990, Section 5, Revision vs. Appeal Whether revision lies where the right of appeal is barred Jurisdiction of Provincial High Courts, Misinterpretation of statutory bar Extraordinary jurisdiction of revision – Principle of justice and error correction – Mariam Beebee v. Seyed Mohamed (68 NLR 36), Somawathie v. Madawela (1983 2 SLR 15), Sunil Chandra Kumar v. Veloo (2001 3 SLR 91), Attorney-General v. Podisingho (51 NLR 385).   Facts The Competent Authority of the Provincial Department of Education, North Western Province, filed an application before the Magistrate’s Court of Chilaw under Section 5 of the State Land (Recovery of P...

A dock statement, though admissible, is not equivalent to sworn testimony and must be weighed cautiously.

Image
  ATTORNEY GENERAL v. WANNIARACHCHIGE RANGA SAMPATH FONSEKA Supreme Court of Sri Lanka — SC Appeal No. 36/2020 Decided on: 24th October 2025 -  Before: Menaka Wijesundera, J., Achala Wengappuli, J., and K. Priyantha Fernando, J. Criminal Law — Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act, No. 13 of 1984 — Sections 54A(a) and (d)   Possession and trafficking of heroin — Dock statement   Evidentiary value — Rebuttal evidence under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act — Defence of alibi — Timing and disclosure — Burden on accused — Procedural fairness — Estoppel and waiver.   The appellant was indicted before the High Court of Colombo for possession and trafficking of 246.14 grams of heroin, contrary to Sections 54A(a) and (d) of the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act, No. 13 of 1984. Two co-accused pleaded guilty and were convicted. The appellant pleaded not guilty, stood trial, and was convicted after full proceedings. T...

Bona Fides of Police Action – Balance between Individual Liberty and Public Safety

Image
Vindani Priyadarshika Sooriyarachchi v. Mangala Dehideniya, Superintendent of Police, and Others   Supreme Court of Sri Lanka – SC/FRA No. 293/2020 Before: K. Priyantha Fernando, J., S. Thurairaja, PC, J., and Sampath Abayakoon, J. Argued on: 15.09.2025 – Decided on: 24.10.2025   Fundamental Rights – Article 12(1) of the Constitution – Equality and Equal Protection of the Law – Search without Warrant – Section 77(2) of the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance – Reasonable Belief – Bona Fides of Police Action – Balance between Individual Liberty and Public Safety Background and Facts   The Petitioner alleged that the Respondents – police officers attached to the Colombo-North Division and Grandpass Police Station – unlawfully entered her residence at No. 75/09, Ferguson Road, Colombo 14, during her absence, by breaking the locks and subsequently replacing them with new ones without a search warrant. No contraband or suspicious items were found dur...

RIGHT OF WAY DISPUTE - SECTION 69

Gamwasam Padigamage Soma Vs. Wickramasinghe Male Pathirama Upuli Nishanthi and Others.   Hon A.L.Shiran Gooneratne,J - C.A. Case No: CA/PHC/105/2010 HC Matara Case No: HCRA 17/2010 - MC Matara Case No: 12496 Judgment on :21/06/2019 - A.L. Shiran Gooneratne J The Respondent-Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the Appellant) is before this Court to have judgment dated 27/10/2010, of the High Court of Matara   granting the use of a 12 feet wide roadway located between the land called   "Waththegewaththa" and Paranawatta set aside. The dispute to the roadway was initiated when the officer in charge of the Akuressa police filed information dated 11/11/2009, under Section 66(1)(a) of the Primary Courts Procedure Act No. 44 of   1979, complaining of a breach of peace between the Appellant and the Petitioner­ Respondent (hereinafter ref erred to as the Respondent ). The learned Magistrate by order dated 03/02/2010, held in favor of the Appellant on the basis ...

RIGHT OF WAY - S 69

  HEWA PATHIRANAGE SOMPALA MUNASINGHE VS K.D.S.SUBHASINGHE   No: CA (PHC) 70/2014 - High Court Kandy Case No: P/HC/Kandy/14/2013(Rev)  Magistrate's Court Kandy Case No. 55160 Order delivered on : 12.01.2023   - Prasantha De Silva, J. - Judgment The Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station-Kandy had filed an information in the Additional Magistrate's Court of Kandy in case bearing No. 55160 in terms of Section 66(1) (a) of the Primary Courts' Procedure Act No. 44 of 1979, with regard to a roadway which had been used by the 1st Respondent and had been obstructed by the 2nd and 3rd Respondents. It is seen that the learned Additional Magistrate who was acting as the Primary Court Judge had taken all necessary steps stipulated in the Primary Courts' Procedure Act. After the conclusion of the inquiry, the learned Additional Magistrate had made an Order on the 24th of January 2013 and held that 1st and 2nd Respondents were not entitled to have a servitudanal rig...

RIGHT OF WAY DISPUTE - SECTION 69 PCP ACT

  OFFICER-IN-CHARGE VS JASING BASTIAN ARACHCHIGE UDENI MANGALIKA   Court of Appeal Case No: CA (PHC) 125/16 - High Court Tangalle Case No: HCRA 18/13 - Magistrate's Court Tangalle Case No: 11522 Decided on: 27.05.2022 -  Prasantha De Silva, J. -  Judgment It appears that the Complainant, being the Officer-in-Charge of Beliaththa Police Station had filed an information in the Primary Court of Tangalle in case bearing No. 11522, under Section 66 of the Primary Courts' Procedure Act regarding a dispute between the 1st Respondent-Petitioner- Respondent [hereinafter sometimes referred to as the 1st Respondent] and the 2nd Respondent- Respondent-Appellant [hereinafter sometimes referred to as the Appellant] in respect of an obstruction of a roadway over the portion of lands marked as M and N in Plan bearing No. 226 dated 12.03.1965. The learned Primary Court Judge thereafter made an Order to affix notices on the subject matter and following the notices, the 3rd R...