Second accused says he was threatened | Daily News
Ranawaka’s case :

Second accused says he was threatened

The Colombo High Court yesterday ordered the second accused in the case against former minister and MP Patali Champika Ranawaka over the motor accident that took place in 2016 at Rajagiriya, to lodge a complaint with any law enforcement agency or institution, if he is threatened.

He also ordered that the legal entity receiving the complaint should conduct an investigation and submit a detailed report to Court.

The order was issued by High Court Judge Damith Thotawatte after considering a complaint lodged by President’s Counsel Maithri Gunaratne that the second accused in the case had received threats from the Colombo Crimes Division.

Gunaratne PC complained to Court that an officer of the Colombo Crimes Division had threatened him over the phone that he would not change the position of the second accused, that he could not be named as a witness in the case, and that he would have to be remanded if he changed his position.

The High Court Judge pointed out that the position of the Second accused pleaded not guilty in all the allegations in the case and it was not clear what his current position was. However, the judge pointed out that if the second accused has an opinion, he has the right to give it to any police station and that he will not issue an order to make such a statement and that it should be done at his discretion.

When the case was taken up yesterday, the judge informed that the case would be fixed for another date as there was insufficient Court staff as per the prevailing circumstances.

President’s Counsel Maithri Gunaratne said that the second accused had been threatened over the phone by an OIC of the Colombo Crimes Division named Neville.

Senior Deputy Solicitor General Dileepa Peiris appearing on behalf of the Attorney General said that Neville was not an OIC but the Acting Director of the Colombo Crimes Division. He said such complaints were made to create in the minds of the judiciary a prejudicial view of the institutions investigating the case. If a complaint is made, the telephone number or the correct information should be submitted at the given time. He also stated that this complaint is an absurd allegation.

 


Add new comment