IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Appeal under and in terms of Article 128 of the Constitution from a Judgment of the Court of Appeal.

Now Between Patali Champika Ranawaka, No. 88/1, Jayanthipura Road, Jayanthipura, Battaramulla.

1st Accused – Petitioner – Appellant SC Appeal No. 116/2022 SC (SPL) LA No. 102/2022 Court of Appeal Application No. CA/LTA 05/2021 vs.

HC Colombo Case No. 1824/2020 Honourable Attorney-General, Attorney-General’s Department, Colombo 12.

Complainant – Respondent –

Respondent Walawe Mahadurage Dilum Thusitha Kumara, Imaduwa, Galle.

2nd Accused – Respondent –

Respondent Wasala Atapattu Samarakoon Mudiyanselage Ralahamige Sudath Asmadala Asmadala Walauwa, Aranayaka.

3rd Respondent – Respondent – Respondent Before: Murdu N.B. Fernando, PC, J.

(as Her Ladyship the present Honourable Chief Justice was then)

E.A.G.R. Amarasekera, J. & Yasantha Kodagoda, PC, J.

Appearance: Faisz Musthapha, PC with Faisza Markar, PC, Amarasiri Panditaratne, Keerthi Thilakarathne and Bishran Iqbal for the 1st Accused – Petitioner – Appellant.

Maithri Gunaratne, PC with I. Shahabdeen for the 2nd Accused – Respondent –

Respondent.

Anil Silva, PC with Amaan Bandara for the

3rd Accused – Respondent – Respondent.

Rohantha Abeysuriya, PC, ASG (as he then was, and presently Senior ASG)

with Dileepa Pieris, Senior DSG (as he then was, and presently ASG) and A. Malik Azeez, SC for the Complainant –

Respondent – Respondent.

Argued on: 15th May 2024 Written Submissions filed on: On 28th June 2024 for the Appellant.

On 8th July 2024 for the Complainant –

Respondent – Respondent – Respondent.

Judgment delivered on: 8th May, 2025 Yasantha Kodagoda, PC, J.

[A] Introduction

1) This is an Appeal against a judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 29th March 2022 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the impugned judgment of the Court of Appeal’), wherein the Court of Appeal had refused to grant Leave to Appeal to that Court in respect of an order dated 2nd December 2021 pronounced by the High Court (hereinafter referred to as ‘the impugned order of the High Court’).

2) On a consideration of a Petition by which the 1st Accused – Petitioner –

Appellant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Appellant’) sought Special Leave to Appeal against the said impugned judgment of the Court of Appeal to this Court, Special Leave had been granted by a differently constituted Bench, on the following questions of law:

i. Did the Court of Appeal fail to appreciate the applicability of the doctrine of ‘issue estoppel’, and therefore err in holding that there was no legal impediment to the forwarding of the present indictment?

ii. Did the Court of Appeal err in failing to consider that it was not open to the Attorney-General to maintain the charges contained in the indictment, without having recourse to setting aside the previous conviction of the 2nd Accused – Respondent – Respondent in case bearing No. 23254/07/2017 of the Magistrate’s Court of Colombo?

iii. Did the Court of Appeal fail to appreciate the distinction between (a) the nature and effect of the doctrine of ‘autrefois acquit’ which is predicated on the basis of the offences being identical, and the (b) nature of the plea of ‘issue estoppel’

iv. Did the Court of Appeal err in law and in fact in concluding that the case before the High Court did not arise out of and had no connection to the charges previously levelled in the Magistrate’s Court of Colombo against the Accused in that case (who is the 2nd Accused – Respondent – Respondent in the present case)?

[Some of the questions have been slightly modified, and emphasis has been added to them to facilitate clarity.]

[B] Background

3) On 28th February 2016 at around 9.55 p.m., a motor vehicle accident occurred on the Sri Jayawardenapura Road, near the Janadhipathi

Vidyalaya in Welikada, Rajagiriya. It involved a jeep bearing No. WP KT 7545 which had been driven towards Borella and a motorcycle bearing No. WP BAK 2011 which had been ridden towards