With concurrence of both parties, Court of Appeal yesterday made orders that former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya shall present before the Financial Criminal Investigation Division (FCID) on 25 June at 9.30 a.m. to make a statement and be present before the Magistrate’s Court when noticed.
The Bench, comprising Justice P. Padman Surasena (President/CA) and Arjuna Obeysekera, fixed the matter to be mentioned on 25 July. On an accord between both parties, the Additional Solicitor General Viraj Dayaratne agreed to consider the possibility of forwarding charge against the Petitioner in the course of the proceedings. He also submitted that the paper containing the summon of proposed adjustment will be tendered. The copy of the proposed summon will be tendered to the Counsel for the Petitioner to peruse.
He undertook that the order already made by the Court on 5 April shall prevent the Petitioner from being arrested and that the under Public Property Act already issued against the Petitioner will not be operative and that there will be no further Certificate against the Petitioner on the offence under Public Property Act.
In view of the above agreement, the Court issued order with the concurrence of both parties.
Court of Appeal, on 29 November, issued an Interim Order as prayed for by the former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksha preventing the Police and FCID from acting on the Certificate (B Report) filed under the offences against the Public Property Act in the Magistrate’s Court.
The Petitioner has stated that the D. A. Rajapaksa Foundation, a statutory body, entered into a contract with the Sri Lanka Reclamation Department for the construction of a monument at Madamulana Weeraketiya. He also has stated that there was no written contract.
Romesh de Silva PC, Ali Sabri PC, Sugath Caldera and Ruwantha Cooray, instructed by Sanath Wijewardane, appeared for the Petitioner.
The Petitioner sought the Court to quash the Certificate (namely B Report – summary report or information to Court by Police) purportedly filed under the Offences Against Public Property Act.
He also sought the Court to prevent the Respondents from proceeding and/or relying upon the said Certificate filed against him.
He asked the Court to prevent the Respondents from relying upon the said Certificate and/or other Certificates to be issued under the said Act in the Magistrate’s Court Case bearing Number B 60485/4/15 until the hearing and final determination of his application.