The Supreme Court of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka
The Supreme Court determination concerned a petition challenging the constitutionality of the “Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment)” Bill, gazetted on 28 March 2025 and placed on Parliament’s Order Paper on 8 April 2025. After hearing submissions, the Court indicated that there was no material to conclude that any provision of the Bill violated the Constitution. The petitioner then withdrew the petition, and the Court dismissed it and terminated proceedings.
Verbatim record (translated)
Machine-translated from Sinhala / Tamil / English¶ 01 Determination of the Supreme Court
¶ 02 In the matter of an application in terms of Article 121 read with Article 120 of the Constitution to determine whether the Bill titled “Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment)” or any part thereof is inconsistent with the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.
¶ 03 S.C. S.D. No. 07/2025
¶ 04 Petitioner: Ambika Satkunanathan, 27, Rudra Mawatha, Colombo 6. Counsel: Pulasthi Hewamanna with Harini Jayawardhana, Fadhila Fairoze and Linuri Munasinghe instructed by Niluka Dissanayake.
¶ 05 Respondent: Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12. Counsel: Sudarshana de Silva SDSG with Dr. Avanti Perera DSG and Sajith Bandara SC.
¶ 06 BEFORE: P. Padman Surasena, J.; Janak de Silva, J.; Sampath B. Abayakoon, J.
¶ 07 The Bench assembled for hearing the Petition on 28th April 2025.
¶ 08 The Bill titled “Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment)” (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the Bill) was published in the Gazette on 28th March 2025 and was placed on the Order Paper of Parliament on 08th April 2025. The Petitioner filed the instant Petition on 21st April 2025 invoking the jurisdiction vested in this Court by virtue of Article 121 read with Article 120 of the Constitution. The Petitioner prayed for a determination under Article 123 of the Constitution.
¶ 09 Court heard the submissions of learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Senior Deputy Solicitor General.
¶ 10 Having considered the submissions, Court took the view that there is no material for the Court to conclude that any of the provisions of this Bill violates any provision of the Constitution. This view was indicated to Counsel in open Court.
¶ 11 Thereafter, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, upon instructions, informed Court that the Petitioner will withdraw the Petition and will not proceed further.
¶ 12 In the above circumstances, Court allows the Petitioner to withdraw this Petition and terminates further proceedings. The Petition stands dismissed.
¶ 13 P. Padman Surasena Judge of the Supreme Court
¶ 14 Janak de Silva Judge of the Supreme Court
¶ 15 Sampath B. Abayakoon Judge of the Supreme Court
Provenance
- Source
- Hansard, Tuesday, 20 May 2025 ·No. 1749010823009957 ·English daily/uncorrected Hansard
- Page · column
- not yet extracted — page/column anchors are not in the current dataset; the source PDF is the citable location.
- Permalink
/lk/speeches/25731
Cite as: The Supreme Court of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. 10th Parliament, Parliament of Sri Lanka. Hansard, 20 May 2025. No. 1749010823009957. Politick, https://staging.politick.io/lk/speeches/25731