IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of Contempt of Court in terms of Article 105(3) of The Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

Court of Appeal No: Attorney-at-law Jayathunga Patabandige CA/COC/0001/23 Susil Priyantha Jayathunga No. 294/A, Kotupathgoda Road, Western Kumbuka, Gonapola.

COMPLAINANT Vs.

President’s Counsel Romesh De Silva, No 79/14, Dr. C.W.W. Kannangara Mawatha, Colombo 07. DEFENDANT Before : Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.

: P. Kumararatnam, J.

Counsel : The complainant supported the matter in person.

Supported on : 10.02.2023 Order on : 09.03.2023 Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.

The complainant, who is also an Attorney-at Law, filed this application supported by a petition and an affidavit. He has filed this application in terms of Article 105 (3) of The Constitution, urging the Court of Appeal to punish the defendant mentioned in the petition for the offence of Contempt of Court. Along with the petition and the affidavit, the complainant tendered a draft charge sheet containing five charges that he intends to pursue against the defendant mentioned. A draft summons also has been tendered.

This matter was supported before this Court by the complainant in person. Having heard the complainant and having scrutinized the petition, affidavit, and the supporting documents, this Order is pronounced as to whether the summons should be issued against the defendant mentioned.

As the complainant has filed this application stating that this is an application in terms of Article 105 (3) of the Constitution, read with Part IX, Chapter LXV, Sections 792 to 800 of the Civil Procedure Code, I would like to comment on the appropriateness of the application in terms of Civil Procedure Code, before considering any other merits of the application.

It appears that by mentioning he is filing this application in terms of the Civil Procedure Code; the complainant is portraying that this is a matter where the procedure laid down in the Civil Procedure Code in relation to the matters in respect of Contempt of Court should be the procedure that needs to be followed.

It is correct if one says that the only statute that has laid down a specific procedure in respect of Contempt of Court is the Civil Procedure Code.

However, the Preamble of the Civil Procedure Code is clear that it is a statute that has been enacted by the legislature in relation to the procedure as to Civil Courts.

The interpretation given to the term “Civil Court” in section 05 of the Civil Procedure Code, which is the interpretation section is that the “Civil Court” means a court in which civil actions may be brought. The Code has dedicated a separate part in relation to the Contempt of Court matters that may arise in civil actions before the Civil Courts.

The power of the Court of Appeal to punish for Contempt of Court has been granted by The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the country. I am of the view that any procedure laid down in regard to the procedure that should be followed by inferior Courts can have no binding effect of the procedure that should be followed by this Court in a matter of Contempt of Court, although such procedure can be used as guidance when relevant, since no rules have been formulated as yet in that regard.

The purpose of Contempt of Court provision in Article 105 (3) of The Constitution is to punish for Contempt of Court whether committed in the presence of the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal or elsewhere.

The relevant Article 105 (3) reads as follows.

Article 105 (3). The Supreme Court of the Republic of Sri Lanka and the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Sri Lanka shall each be a superior Court of record and shall have all the powers of such Court including the power to punish for contempt of itself, whether committed in the Court itself or elsewhere, with imprisonment or fine or both as the Court may deem fit. The power of the Court of Appeal shall include the power to punish fo