IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Application in the nature of Writs of Mandamus under Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

1. Ms Bulathsinghalage Chamali, 63, Haritha Uyana, Batagoda, CA (Writ) Application No: Galpatha Horana.

449/2024

2. Ronald Michael Stanley, Permanently Residing at

4, Natalie Court Cranbourne Victoria 3977 Australia.

Temporarily Residing at, 49 Lionel Edirisinghe Mw Colombo 5.

PETITIONERS -Vs-

1. I.G.P., Sri Lanka Police, Police Head Quarters, Colombo.

2. Officer-In-Charge, Police Station, Wellawatte.

3. Honourable Attorney General, Attorney General's Department, Colombo 12.

RESPONDENTS Before: S. U. B. Karalliyadde, J.

Mayadunne Corea, J.

Counsel: The Petitioners appear in person.

Kanishka Rajakaruna, SC for the 3rd Respondent.

Supported on: 18.07.2024 Order delivered on: 03.10.2024 S. U. B. Karalliyadde, J.

This Order pertains to the issuance of formal notices on the Respondents. This Application revolves around a case filed in the Magistrate’s Court of Mount Lavinia bearing No. B.2969/1/15, the proceedings are marked as X1. The Petitioners appearing in person in Court state that, one Mr. Fernando and a few others attempted to take the 2^nd Petitioner into their custody forcefully, but failed to do so. Thereafter, on the same day, while the 1^st Petitioner who was an employee of the 2^nd Petitioner was taking the 2^nd Petitioner in her car to meet his lawyer, a vehicle blocked them and assaulted the 1^st Petitioner. Pursuant to a Police complaint, the Officer-In-Charge of the Police Station of Wellawatta (the 2^nd Respondent) instituted the action mentioned above in the Magistrate’s Court of Mount Lavinia.

The said case was originally filed against five accused for committing criminal intimidation and voluntarily causing hurt to the 1^st Petitioner. The 1^st and the 2^nd accused in the Magistrate’s Court case pleaded guilty and the learned Magistrate ordered them to pay compensation to the 1^st Petitioner (A3). Thereafter, the case in the Magistrate’s Court proceeded against the three remaining accused and after the trial they were acquitted by the learned Magistrate by the Judgement dated 15.12.2023. The Petitioners allege that the Police Sergeant Gunarathne who gave evidence as witness No. 3 (A1) in the Magistrate’s Court case has not performed any official duty regarding the incident. The Police Sergeant Karunarathne has recorded the statement of the 1^st Petitioner (A6). The Petitioners allege that both Police Officers, Gunarathne and Karunarathne bear the same Police Sergeant number (No. 6967) and the Police Sergeant P.S. Gunaratne, despite not doing any official act regarding the complaint, intentionally and maliciously giving false evidence at the trial testified that he has recorded the statement of the 1^st Petitioner.

The Petitioners further allege that the amended charge sheet served on the 3^rd to 5^th accused is erroneous for the reason that while giving evidence at the trial even though the 1^st Petitioner has clearly stated that the 3^rd to 5^th accused did not assault her but abetted the other two accused to commit the offence, the learned Magistrate erroneously directed the Police to maintain the charge of voluntarily causing hurt against the 3^rd to 5^th accused and thereby the Police has submitted a false report to Court upon which the charge sheet was later amended by the learned Magistrate (X1). The Petitioners further allege that even though the 2^nd Petitioner sent a letter dated 06.07.2024 marked as X2 requesting the Attorney General (the 3^rd Respondent) to file a revision application in the High Court against the acquittal of the accused, the 3^rd Respondent did not take any action regarding that request. As per the prayer to the Petition of this Writ Application the Petitioners seek inter alia, the following substantive reliefs from the Court, (b) To revoke the order given by the Honourable Magistrate on 2023/