Alankuda state land case: Five suspects remanded

Five persons who were allegedly involved in selling a block of 92 acres of state land in Kalpitiya to a resort company by presenting a forged deed and court judgment were remanded till October 5 by a Colombo Court today.

When the case pertaining to the state land grabbing in Alankuda, Kalpitiya came up before the Colombo Fort Magistrate Ms. Lanka Jayaratne, the CID alleged that the five persons presented in Court had allegedly involved in a fraudulent act while they were selling the state land in question to the resort company.

The CID further alleged that suspects had presented a fake court judgment in respect of the land in question while they were selling it to buyers. The CID further told court that they were unable to locate such a court judgment in respect of this particular land blocks.

Defence Counsel who appeared on behalf of the suspects denied the charges levelled against his clients. He contended that state land cannot be transferred to other parties and he further said that no losses were incurred to the government due to this transaction.

Having considered the submissions, Magistrate Ms. Lanka Jayaratne ordered that the five suspects, Siddhi Rumisha, Ummu Kulthum, Abdul Kalam Asad, Siddhi Surat and Jamaldeen Marikkar be remanded till October 5 since the investigations into the matter had not been concluded.

At a previous magisterial inquiry, the suspect Dallas Martenstyn a director of the resort company was also produced in court on charges of selling blocks of land to foreign buyers. Subsequently, he was released on a cash bail of Rs.20,000 and a surety of Rs.250,000.

Meanwhile, the Magistrate today asked the CID as to why they had not arrested suspect Viren Perera another director of the resort company over the same allegations. The CID informed Court that they would seek the Attorney General’s advise regarding the matter. At that time, the Magistrate observed that the CID should arrest him since they had already arrested a resort company director.

The Magistrate further observed that the divisional secretariat of the relevant area should have been vigilant over this issue. (Lakmal Sooriyagoda)