IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Appeal in terms of Article 128 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

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

Complainant S.C. Appeal No.14/2019 SC/SPL/LA No. 125/2014 Court of Appeal Case No.

C.A.95/2011 A.B.C.

H.C. Avissawella No. 58/2006 Vs.

1. Singappuli Arachchilage Rumesh Sameera Dissanayake alias Gaminige Kolla

2. Baduwala Wahampurage Podinona, 3. Kalanchidewage Suresh Nandana Accused And

1. Singappuli Arachchilage Rumesh Sameera Dissanayake alias Gaminige Kolla

2. Baduwala Wahampurage Podinona, 3. Kalanchidewage Suresh Nandana

1st, 2nd, and 3rd Accused-

Appellants Vs.

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

Complainant—Respondent AND NOW Kalanchidewage Suresh Nandana Presently at Remond Prison Welikada, Boralla, Colombo 08.

3rd Accused-Appellant-Appellant Vs.

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

Complainant—Respondent-

Respondent BEFORE : P. PADMAN SURASENA, J.

ACHALA WENGAPPULI, J.

MAHINDA SAMAYAWARDHENA, J.

COUNSEL : Anil Silva P. C. with Amaan Bandara for the

3rd Accused-Appellant- Petitioner-Appellant Rohantha Abeysuriya P.C. A.S.G. for the Hon.

Attorney General ARGUED ON : 21st January, 2022 DECIDED ON : 09^th February,2024 ACHALA WENGAPPULI, J.

The 3rd Accused-Appellant-Appellant (hereinafter referred to as “the Appellant”) was indicted along with 1st and 2nd Accused- Appellants-Petitioners (Petitioners of SC Spl. LA No. 126/2014 and hereinafter referred to as the 1st and 2nd accused) before the High Court of Avissawella for committing attempted murder on Thotapitiya Arachchilage Kusumawathie and, in the course of same transaction, committing murders of Hetti Arachchige Susantha and Hetti Arachchige Swarna on or about 26.10.2003. All three accused elected a trial without a Jury. After the ensuing trial, during which the Appellant as well as the 1st and 2nd accused made statements from the dock denying any involvement with the offences to which they were accused of, the High Court found three of them guilty on all counts contained in the indictment.

In relation to the 1st count of attempted murder the High Court imposed a term of 20-year Rigorous Imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 50,000.00 on each of the accused, coupled with a default term of imprisonment, whereas the Court imposed death sentence on them in respect of the 2nd and 3rd counts.

All three accused have individually preferred appeals against the Judgment of the High Court in appeal No. CA 95/2011 (A, B and C) and the Court of Appeal by its consolidated Judgment dated 19.06.2014, affirmed the convictions entered against them and along with the sentences imposed by the High Court, before proceeding to dismiss their appeals.

Thereupon, the Appellant had sought Special Leave to Appeal from this Court against the said Judgment of the Court of Appeal. When the said application for Special Leave bearing No. SC SPL. LA No. 125/2014 was supported on 09.01.2019, this Court thought it fit to grant Special Leave to Appeal on the questions of law, as set out in sub paragraphs 12(b), 12(c) and 12(d) of his Petition dated 25.07.2014. The joint application of the 1st and 2nd accused seeking Special Leave to Appeal under application No. SC SPL LA No. 126/2014, against the dismissal of their appeals by the Court of appeal too was taken up for support on the same day but, they were unable to persuade this Court to grant leave.

The three questions of law, on which special leave to appeal was granted in relation to the impugned Judgment of the Court of Appeal, are as follows;

(b) Did the Learned Judges of the Court of Appeal fail to appreciate that the entirety of the evidence led at the trial in the High Court do not justify the conviction of the Appellant of the offences set out in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd charges of the Indictment?

(c) Did the Learned Judges of the Court of Appeal fail to appreciate th