IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Appeal in terms of section 331 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979.

Court of Appeal No: Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka CA/HCC/0328/2015 COMPLAINANT CA (Criminal) L.A. No. 7/2015 Vs.

High Court of Trincomalee Rathnayaka Mudiyanselage Susantha Case No: HCT/459/11 Nimal Gunathilaka ACCUSED AND NOW Lokubaduge Dinesha Sanjeewani No. 159D, 4th Post, Kandu Road, Trincomalee.

AGGRIEVED PARTY-PETITIONER Rathnayaka Mudiyanselage Susantha Nimal Gunathilaka ACCUSED-RESPONDENT Vs.

The Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12.

COMPLAINANT-RESPONDENT AND NOW BETWEEN Lokubaduge Dinesha Sanjeewani No. 159D, 4th Post, Kandu Road, Trincomalee.

AGGRIEVED PARTY-PETITIONER-

APPELLANT Rathnayaka Mudiyanselage Susantha Nimal Gunathilaka ACCUSED-RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT Vs.

The Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12.

COMPLAINANT-RESPONDENT-

RESPONDENT Before : Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.

: P. Kumararatnam, J.

Counsel : Anil Silva, P.C. with Amaan Bandara for the Appellant : Anuja Premaratna, P.C. with Nayana Dissanayake, Aviska Jayawardana, Natasha de Alwis, Bandula Dissanayake, Ishan Gampolage and Ramith Dunusinghe for the Accused-Respondent : Suharshie Herath Jayaweera, D.S.G. for the Complainant-Respondent Argued on : 12-03-2024 Written Submissions : 19-05-2020 (By the Aggrieved Party-Petitioner-

Appellant)

: 20-02-2020 (By the Accused-Respondent)

Decided on : 20-06-2024 Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.

The accused-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the accused) was indicted before the High Court of Trincomalee for committing the following offences.

1. That he committed the offence of sexual harassment to the female mentioned in the count by embracing her and touching her face on or about 15-01-2011 at Trincomalee within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Trincomalee, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 345 as amended by the Amendment Act No. 22 of 1995 of the Penal Code.

2. That he committed the offence of sexual harassment on the same female mentioned in the count one by embracing her and stroking her head on or about 16-01-2011 at Trincomalee within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Trincomalee, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 345 as amended by the Amendment Act No. 22 of 1995 of the Penal Code.

3. That he committed the offence of sexual harassment on the same female mentioned in the above two counts by embracing her and kissing her face and lips on or about 30-01-2011 at Trincomalee within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Trincomalee, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 345 as amended by Amendment Act No. 22 of 1995 of the Penal Code.

After trial, of the judgment dated 16-09-2015, the learned High Court Judge of Trincomalee acquitted the accused on the basis that he is giving the benefit of the doubt in favour of the accused.

Although the Hon. Attorney General has thought it fit not to appeal the acquittal of the accused, the PW-01 of the indictment (the aggrieved party) who faced the incidents of sexual harassment has filed an application in terms of section 16 of the Judicature Act No. 2 of 1978 seeking leave to appeal from the Court of Appeal to file an appeal against the said acquittal.

After having obtained the relevant leave to appeal from the Court of Appeal, the aggrieved party has preferred this appeal.

At the hearing of this appeal, the learned President’s Counsel who represented the aggrieved party (the victim mentioned in the indictment and who has given evidence as PW-01 at the trial) expressed the view that this was a judgment pronounced by the learned High Court Judge of Trincomalee by being completely misdirected as to the relevant law and the relevant facts of the matter.

He was of the view that the judgment entered cannot be termed as a proper judgment pronounced in terms of section 283 of