IGP tells no sufficient evidence against HC Judge Gihan Pilapitiya

The Inspector General of Police has informed Court of Appeal that investigations carried out against High Court Judge Gihan Pilapitiya had not revealed sufficient evidence regarding the controversial telephone conversations with former Deputy Minister Ranjan Ramanayake.

President's Counsel Uditha Egalahewa appearing for the IGP made these revelation pursuant to a writ petition filed by High Court Judge Gihan Pilapitiya who sought an order preventing the IGP and his agents from arresting him regarding the controversial telephone conversations. 

President's Counsel Romesh de Silva appearing for High Court Judge Gihan Pilapitiya moved Court that an order be issued directing Nugegoda Magistrate's Court to release his client from the case since there is no sufficient evidence against him.

The Court of Appeal Justice Justice Sobhitha Rajakaruna and Justice Dhammika Ganepola announced that order regarding this application will be delivered on October 25.

The Court of Appeal has already issued an order directing police not to arrest  High Court Judge Gihan Pilapitiya without an order issued by a competent Court. 

The petitioner, High Court Judge Gihan Pilapitiya is also seeking an interim order suspending the operation of the direction of the Attorney General to the Acting IGP to cause his arrest regarding these controversial telephone conversations.   

In his petition, Petitioner Gihan Pilapitiya states that he filed this Application in his capacity to safeguard his liberty as well as in the interest of preserving the independence of the Judiciary and rule of law. 

The Petitioner says he is a Judicial Officer having been appointed on the 1st January 2003 and up to the time of his interdiction, was serving as a Judge of the High Court of the Republic in Embilipitiya. The Petitioner further stated that during his entire career as a Judge he served the country and its people without any fear or favour and dedicated himself for the cause of dispensing justice and upholding the law to the best of his ability.  

The Petitioner states that while serving as a High Court Judge the police recovered several tape recordings from the premises of Parliamentarian Ranjan Ramanayake. The Petitioner states that one of such tapes related to a conversation between the Petitioner and the said Ranjan Ramanayake.

The Petitioner states that he received a letter dated 8th January 2020 from the Judicial Services Commission asking him to explain. The Petitioner states that as per newspaper reports, the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) has recommended the interdiction of the Petitioner to the President.  The Petitioner states that subsequently, the President interdicted the Petitioner.  

The Petitioner states that he is not guilty of any offence under the law. The Petitioner states that it was in the public media that an Officer of the Attorney General’s Department known as herself the “Coordinating Secretary to the Attorney General” has stated that the Attorney General has directed the Petitioner to be arrested. 

The Petitioner states that it is reported in the press that the Attorney General has called for an explanation from the 1st Respondent to carry out the orders of the Attorney General to arrest the Petitioner. The Petitioner states that it was reported in the press that the Attorney General is not satisfied with the explanation given by the IGP. (Lakmal Sooriyagoda)