IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application for mandates in the nature of Writs of Certiorari and Procedendo under and in terms of Article 140 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

CA WRIT APPLICATION NO : Fredrick Christopher Jerome Fernando, CA/WRIT/810/2023 Hydepark Residencies, Apartment No. 4/2, No.79, Hydepark Corner, Colombo 02.

(Currently remanded and held in the Welikada remand prison)

PETITIONER -Vs-

1. Deshabandu Thennakoon Acting Inspector General of Police, Police Headquarters, Colombo 01

2. Prasad Ranasinghe Deputy Inspector General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Colombo 01.

3. Kavinda Piyasekara Senior Superintendent of Police, Director, Criminal Investigations Department Colombo 01.

4. B.M.A.S.K. Senaratne Chief Inspector of Police, Officer in Charge, Digital Forensic Laboratory And Training Unit, Criminal Investigations Department, Colombo 01.

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

6. Hon. Thilina Gamage Magistrate-Fort RESPONDENTS Before: Hon. D.N. Samarakoon, J.

Counsel: Ronald Perera P.C., with Chandimal Mendis and Sharfi Mohideen instructed by Sanath Wijewardane for the Petitioner.

Shaminda Wickrema, Senior State Counsel with Shemanthi Dunuwille State Counsel for the Attorney General.

Supported on: 18.12.2023 Synopsis of Oral Submissions tendered on: 19.12.2023 Decided on: 22.12.2023 D.N. Samarakoon, J The 05^th respondent, the Attorney General has submitted, among other things, in the synopsis of oral submissions, that, “The petitioner should not be treated thus as a privileged suitor, but should be equally treated as any other citizen before the law.”

(paragraph 06(ii))

As this Court already indicated at the oral hearing too, at this stage, this Court will not consider the merits of the application. The purpose of this Order is to decide on the preliminary objections raised for the 05^th respondent and by permission of Court by the individuals represented by Mr. Sanjeewa Jayawardane P. C. and his junior. Both the above parties and the petitioner have tendered synopsises. The learned President’s Counsel for the petitioner was only heard in reply to preliminary objections and not on merits of the application. If there were at the oral submissions and also in this Order, any reference to facts, it is only in so far as related to the extent to which they were referred to by opposing learned counsel and replied by the petitioner’s counsel. Even then, this Court at the oral hearing informed learned counsel not to go into the main allegations of the merits. The petitioner has come before this Court in Judicial Review and the 05th respondent and other individuals above referred to say the application of the petitioner should not be entertained.

This Order is on that question.

The 05^th respondent in no less than 11 places in his synopsis has referred to “Bench Hunting/Forum Shopping” and as this Court indicated at the oral hearing, that was the main reason the Court wanted to make this Order without delay. Since the frequent reference to this allegation by the 05th respondent shows that it is the main allegation much of this Order is devoted to discuss it.

It is also submitted by the 05^th respondent, that, “The respondent contends that obvious irregularities in the conduct of the Illegal Assets Investigation Division of the CID in these investigations point to the presence of other factors in addition to those seen on the surface. Therefore there is an enhanced need for thorough scrutiny and absolute transparency in determining even this matter and also to ensure that not only is justice done, but “justice is seen to be done”. Therefore if this case continues, it would be much more suitable and justiciable for all parties concerned that this matter is taken up before a 2 Bench as submitted to Court in detail during oral submissions and also in this synopsis”. (paragraph 05(v))

It is said, “In