SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SRI)(CA) 401

COURT OF APPEAL
Hon. Sampath B. Abayakoon J
Nalantha Sisira Kumara MaddumaPatabendi – Appellant
Versus
Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption – Respondent
CA/HCC/0023/19



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: Director General, CA/HCC/0023/19 Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption, No. 36, Malalasekara Mawatha, Colombo 07.

COMPLAINANT Vs.

High Court of Colombo Nalantha Sisira Kumara Madduma Case No: HCB 1976/2013 Patabendi No. 183/41, Siriliya Niwasa, Siyambalagoda, Polgasowita.

ACCUSED AND NOW BETWEEN Nalantha Sisira Kumara Madduma Patabendi No. 183/41, Siriliya Niwasa, Siyambalagoda, Polgasowita.

ACCUSED-APPELLANT Vs.

Director General, Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption, No. 36, Malalasekara Mawatha, Colombo 07.

COMPLAINANT-RESPONDENT Before : Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.

: P. Kumararatnam, J.

Counsel : Kapila Waidyaratne, P.C. with Akkila Jayasundara and Akhila Mathishi for the Accused-Appellant : Ruvini Wickramasinghe, Deputy Director General of CIABOC for the Respondent Argued on : 05-08-2024 Written Submissions : 18-10-2019 (By the Accused-Appellant)

: 22-11-2019 (By the Respondent)

Decided on : 23-10-2024 Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.

This is an appeal preferred by the accused-appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) on the basis of being aggrieved of his conviction and the sentence by the learned High Court Judge of Colombo. The appellant was indicted before the High Court of Colombo in terms of 12 counts preferred under the provisions of the Bribery Act. The said counts are as follows.

1. He, being a Government Servant and an Excise Guard attached to the Excise Office of Tangalle, solicited a gratification of Rs. 5000/= from Satharasinghe Gamage Premawathi alias Hemawathi, between the periods of 20-03-2012 and 28-04-2012, for not initiating legal action against Tibbotuwawa Gamage Piyadasa for the offence of having White Beedi in possession, at Tangalle, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 16(b) of the Bribery Act.

2. At the same transaction and on 28-04-2012, accepting a gratification of Rs. 5000/= from the earlier mentioned Premawathi alias Hemawathi, and thereby committing an offence punishable in terms of section 16(b)

of the Bribery Act.

3. At the same time and at the same transaction mentioned in count 1, being a Government Servant and an Excise Guard attached to the Excise Office of Tangalle, solicited a gratification of Rs. 5000/= from the earlier mentioned Premawathi alias Hemawathi, and thereby committing an offence punishable in terms of section 19(c) of the Bribery Act.

4. At the same time and at the same transaction mentioned in count 2, the appellant committed an offence punishable in terms of section 19(c) of the Bribery Act by accepting Rs. 5000/= as a gratification from the earlier mentioned Premawathi alias Hemawathi.

5. At the same time and at the same transaction mentioned in count 1, the appellant solicited a bribe of Rs. 1000/= to allow her to sell White Beedi without a permit, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 16(b) of the Bribery Act.

6. At the same time and at the same transaction mentioned in count 1, the appellant solicited a bribe of Rs. 1000/= from the earlier mentioned Premawathi alias Hemawathi, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 19(c) of the Bribery Act.

7. The appellant, being a Government Servant and an Excise Guard attached to the Excise Office of Tangalle, solicited a bribe of Rs. 10,000/= from Siriwardana Pathiranage Lionel not to prosecute him for having White Beedi in his possession, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 16(b) of the Bribery Act.

8. At the same time and at the same transaction mentioned in count 7, the appellant accepted a sum of Rs. 4000/= as a gratification from the earlier mentioned Lionel not to prosecute him before a Court of law, and thereby committed an offence punishable in terms of section 16(b)

of the Bribery Act.

9. At

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top