IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application under and in terms of Articles 17 and 126 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka Case No. S.C (F/R) 405/ 2018 Ganeshan Samson Roy, No. 84. /90, Nawala Road, Colombo 05 PETITIONER Vs.

1. M.M. Janaka Marasinghe Police Inspector Officer in Charge Special Investigation Unit 11 Criminal Investigation Department Colombo 01

2. A.S Sudasinghe Sub Inspector of Police Investigation Officer Criminal Investigation Department Colombo 01

3. H.G.C.P. Priyadharshana (87254)

Police Constable Investigating Officer Criminal Investigation Department Colombo 01

4. Shani Abeysekera Senior Superintendent of Police Director Criminal Investigations Division Colombo 01

5. Pujith Jayasundara Inspector General of Police Police Headquarters Colombo 01

5A. C.D. Wickremaratne Inspector General of Police Police Headquarters Colombo 01

6.M.M Saveen Chathuranga Gunaratne No.259/14, Pamunuwa Gardens Pamunuwila Gonawila

7. Officer in Charge Remand Prison, Mahara

8. The Honourable Attorney General Attorney General’s Department Hulftsdorp Colombo 12 RESPONDENTS BEFORE: B.P Aluwihare, PC, J.

A.H.M.D. Nawaz, J.

Mahinda Samayawardhena, J.

COUNSEL: Senany Dayarathne with Eshanthi Mendis for the Petitioner Induni Punchihewa, SC for the 01^st to 03^rd, 05A and 8^th Respondents Migara Kodithuwakku instructed by Ruskshan Aravinda Gamage for the 06th Respondent ARGUED ON: 10.02.2023.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Petitioner on 03.09.2019 01st, 03rd, 05A and 8th Respondents on 17.06.2020 DECIDED ON: 20.09.2023 Aluwihare, PC, J.

The Petitioner, an employee of George Steuart (Pvt) Limited, complained that his Fundamental Rights enshrined in Articles 11, 12(1), 13(1) and 13(2) of the Constitution were violated by the Respondents. The 6^th Respondent is a private party, and the Petitioner alleges that the 6^th Respondent lodged a false complaint against him with the Criminal Investigation Department, which the Petitioner claims, led to his arrest. On 01.02.2019, this Court granted Leave to Proceed for the alleged violations of the Fundamental Rights of the Petitioner under Articles 12(1), 13(1)

and 13(2) of the Constitution.

The Factual Background According to the Petitioner, he had been acquainted with a certain Rehana Marian Sebastian [Hereinafter referred to as Rehana] for a long time. Sometime later, Rehana introduced the Petitioner to her sister, presently, his wife, Stephanie Sylvia Sebastian. The Petitioner’s relationship with the 6th Respondent resulted from his acquaintance with Rehana. The Petitioner states that the 6^th Respondent and Rehana had entered into a loan agreement for a sum of Rupee Fifty-Three Million whereby Rehana had agreed to pay back the principal with an interest of 12% per annum, to the 6th Respondent. The Petitioner’s position was that he was totally oblivious to this transaction between the 6^th Respondent and Rehana, at the time the incident central to the present application took place. At some point Rehana had approached the Petitioner, stating that she was receiving money from a friend, namely the 6^th Respondent and had requested the Petitioner to facilitate the said transaction by permitting that money to be credited to his bank account and provided a letter (Marked P 13) which states that she was to receive money from a friend as a loan on interest and that she does not have a bank account with the Sampath Bank PLC. This request, that is to allow her friend to deposit the said money to the Petitioner’s account, appears to have been made purely for their convenience. The Petitioner had agreed because of his close relationship with Rehana and this conduct on the part of the Petitioner does not appear to be unusual given the fact that Rehana was his sister -in- law to be.

Sometime after this request was made, a sum of Rupees seven million Rupees 7,000, 000 /- was deposited to the Petitioner’s account in several tranches, which the Petitioner ha