News
Pivituru Hela Urumaya Leader out on bail in misappropriation case
The Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court released UPFA Parliamentarian and Pivituru Hela Urumaya Leader Udaya Gammanpila on bail. He was in remand allegedly for misappropriation of money belonging to an Australian investor.
Colombo Fort Magistrate Ms. Lanka Jayaratne noted that although the charge of misappropriation of money was a serious offence and non-bailable, the suspect could be released on bail on the specific reasons since the complaint was made in 2015, several years after the alleged incident and that there were no complaints of threats made by the Australian investors or any other interference by the suspect.
The Magistrate released Gammanpila on Rs. 25,000 cash bail and three sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.
| SC reserves decision on Gammanpila’s rights plea On Wednesday, the Supreme Court reserved its decision whether to fully hear the rights plea of Gammanpila challenging his arrest and detention and to release him on conditions as an interim relief sought by him. President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva appearing for the petitioner said the issue before court is whether there is violation of the rights of the petitioner by the illegal arrest and detention by the Special Investigation Unit (SIU). He told that court that the illegal arrest and detention of the petitioner was a clear case of political victimisation and there was not an iota of evidence against him misappropriating the money. The President’s Counsel argued that the Attorney General and the SIU had come out with two different reasons for the arrest of the petitioner. Answering a question asked by the court, the Deputy Solicitor General said that the charge against the petitioner was misappropriation of some 20 million rupees. Although the petitioner was not given any reason by the time of the arrest by the SIU, the reason attributed to the SIU for his arrest later was aiding and abetting of the misappropriation of shares in Pan Asia Bank. The President’s Counsel asked how the petitioner could misappropriate the shares when they are actually held by the company secretary of the bank. The petitioner had “appropriated” the money in question to the sixth respondent Sydney Jayasinghe who has power of attorney for Data Nominees, told the President’s Counsel the petitioner never misappropriated the money. “My responsibility is over as I handed over the money. What happened to that money thereafter I did not know.” Money could have been credited to any other accounts or could have been transferred out of the country. Sixth respondent is still the holder of the power of attorney for the principal. He also contended that the order of the magistrate refusing bail to the petitioner was palpably wrong. Deputy Solicitor General Ayesha Jinadasa for the Attorney General submitted that the proceeds from the sale of shares never went to the accounts of the Data Nominees (DN), i.e. DN never received the sale of shares. She added that the rupees 16 million had been debited from the DN accounts to buy the shares of the Pan Asia Bank and credited to the Pan Asia Bank. But when they disposed of the shares the money was not credited to the accounts of the DN. The DSG told court that the charge against the petitioner was misappropriation of rupees 20 million. But the sixth respondent power of attorney holder for DN was charged with the criminal breach of trust. The criminal breach of trust arises from the conduct of the sixth respondent who had not deposited 20 million rupees in DN accounts, given by the petitioner, money given to him by Dhammika Perera. The Bench comprised Chief Justice K. Sripavan and Justice Upali Abeyratne. Petitioner Gammanpila stated that he played a key role in the Joint Opposition and in the present Parliament. The petitioner cited Special Investigation Unit (SIU) Inspector M.D.C.P. Gunathilake, its Director SSP Mevan Silva, IGP, Australian Brian John Shaddick, his Power of Attorney Holder Lasitha Indeewara Perera, SIU ASP Bandara, Sydney Jayasinghe and the Attorney General were Respondents. He was seeking a declaration that the respondents have violated his fundamental rights and was also seeking an interim order directing the Respondents release him on bail and a court order compensation of Rs. 500 million from the respondents. Romesh de Silva PC with Sugath Caldera appeared for the Petitioner. Senior Deputy Solicitor General Ayesha Jinasena appeared for the Attorney General. Manohara de Silva PC appeared for Sydney Jayasinghe.
|