SL Advocacy

  අපරාධ නඩුවකදී සාක්ෂිකරුවකු ලෙසින් චූදිතයකුට එරෙහිව එම චූදිතයාගේ කලත්‍රයා සාක්ෂියට කැඳවීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් වැදගත් වන්නේ සාක්ෂි ආඥාපනතේ 120 වන වගන්තියේ 120(2) සිට (5) දක්වා වන උප වගන්ති වේ. එම උප වගන්ති පහත පරිදි ය.   (2) In criminal proceedings against any person the husband or wife of such person respectively shall be a competent witness if called by the accused, but in that case all communications between them shall cease to be privileged. (3) In criminal proceedings against a husband or wife for any bodily injury or violence inflicted on his or her wife or husband, such wife or husband shall be a competent and compellable witness. (4) In criminal proceedings against a husband or wife for any attempt to cause any bodily injury or violence on his or her wife or husband, such wife or husband shall be a competent witness for the prosecution. (5) In criminal proceedings against a husband or wife for an offence punishable under section 362 B or 362 C of the Penal Code, th...

  A Case of Prolonged Execution and Legal Technicalities Introduction The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, in its judgment delivered on 14th March 2025 , addressed a complex and protracted legal dispute concerning the execution of a decree related to the possession of a Buddhist temple, Jinaraja Viharaya, in Veyangoda. The case, which spanned over three decades, involved multiple legal proceedings, appeals, and revisions, highlighting the challenges faced in executing court decrees in Sri Lanka. The judgment, authored by Justice Mahinda Samayawardhena, provides a comprehensive analysis of the legal principles governing the execution of decrees, the role of the Fiscal, and the procedural requirements under the Civil Procedure Code. This article delves into the key legal points discussed in the judgment, supported by quotations from the judgment and relevant case law. Background of the Case The dispute originated in 1995 when the original plaintiff, Rev. Ratmale Sri Somarathn...

  Supreme Court's Landmark Judgment on Anticipatory Bail: A Detailed Analysis In a significant ruling on March 14, 2024, the Supreme Court of India delivered a judgment in the case of Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Anr. , addressing critical legal issues surrounding anticipatory bail, the issuance of non-bailable warrants, and the consequences of absconding. The judgment, authored by Justice C.T. Ravikumar, provides a comprehensive analysis of the legal principles governing anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) and the implications of non-compliance with court orders. Background of the Case The appellants, Srikant Upadhyay and others, were accused in FIR No. 79 of 2020, registered at Govindganj Police Station, East Champaran, Bihar. The charges included offenses under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354(B), 379, 504, 506, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Witch (Drain) Practic...

  The case of Podi Menika v. Heen Menike is a fascinating exploration of several key legal principles, including laesio enormis , unjust enrichment, and the requirements for proving the passing of valuable consideration in property transactions. This judgment, delivered by the Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka, provides valuable insights into the application of Roman-Dutch law principles in modern legal disputes. In this article, we will delve into the facts of the case, the legal issues at stake, and the court's reasoning, while also discussing the broader implications of the judgment. Facts of the Case The case revolved around a quatimet action, which is a legal action seeking a declaration of rights to a share in a property. The plaintiff-appellant, Podi Menika, sought a declaration that she was entitled to the land interests that the defendant-respondent, Heen Menike, was entitled to in a partition case (District Court of Kandy Partition Case No. P/9575). The plaintiff...