Lady lawyer case raises serious questions after CID evidence in the Ganemulle Sanjeewa murder probe allegedly changed suddenly.
The lady lawyer case linked to the Ganemulle Sanjeewa murder probe has raised grave suspicion over whether serious evidence submitted by the CID changed overnight.
A major question now stands before society: is there an invisible hand operating behind the Criminal Investigation Department, powerful enough to alter the very foundations of the law within hours?
Yesterday, June 2, Colombo Chief Magistrate Asanga S. Bodaragama raised sharp questions over the sudden change in serious written evidence previously submitted to court by the CID.
The Magistrate ordered that a detailed report be filed immediately regarding this controversial development.
The incident centres on a female lawyer from the Kadawatha area, identified as Thamara Kumari Abeyrathne.
She had been in remand custody on allegations of aiding and abetting the murder of underworld figure “Ganemulle Sanjeewa” inside the Colombo Magistrate’s Court premises.
The other suspects connected to the matter include Mahesh Obeyesekera and Lakshitha Sri Dulaj.
The lady lawyer had been detained and questioned under the Prevention of Terrorism Act for 182 days.
Earlier, the CID had reported to court that she allegedly maintained direct links with major drug traffickers such as Kehelebadda Podi and members of the underworld.
On three previous occasions, the CID had confirmed through “B” reports that she allegedly operated eight bank accounts using forged identities and had circulated a suspicious sum exceeding Rs. 24 million within just two years.
In addition, the Colombo Crime Division had submitted facts claiming that six clear pieces of evidence had emerged against her.
Those allegations included claims that she had provided gowns required to disguise the assassins as lawyers, fake lawyer identity cards bearing her signature, and even books allegedly used to conceal firearms on February 19, 2025.
However, in a move that stunned the judicial process, the CID suddenly informed court that it would no longer proceed against these suspects under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.
Chief Magistrate Bodaragama openly questioned the CID over this reversal, reminding investigators that those who stand before the law are human beings, not merely suspects.
“How did that serious evidence, presented to court on three occasions, change overnight? Have the millions of rupees in the fake IDs and accounts now become false?” the Magistrate questioned.
The court also noted that decisions cannot be made solely on the CID’s verbal assurance that further investigations would continue only under the Criminal Assets Recovery Act.
Accordingly, the Magistrate ordered that a consolidated evidence report be submitted immediately under Section 123 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The three suspects were once again remanded until the 5th of next month.
As this case continues, society is now asking a disturbing question that cuts through even the blindfold of Lady Justice: at whose request, and for whose benefit, did the evidence change?
