The Krrish case against Namal Rajapaksa took a dramatic turn after a High Court judge alleged the CID intentionally delayed the trial.
The Krrish case against Parliamentarian Namal Rajapaksa has sparked renewed questions over institutional accountability and transparency within Sri Lanka’s criminal justice system after a Colombo High Court judge strongly criticised the conduct of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). The remarks were made when the case was taken up before the Colombo High Court on June 25.
CID’s Contradictory Position Under Scrutiny
When the matter came before court for a pre-trial conference on May 29, the CID informed the court that it remained in contact with the two principal Indian national witnesses connected to the case. Based on that assurance, the department indicated there was no requirement to invoke the special legal procedure for issuing summons to foreign witnesses, prompting the court to fix July 07 as the date for the commencement of the trial.
However, with only two weeks remaining before the scheduled trial date, the Attorney General moved to have the case recalled. During the proceedings, Deputy Solicitor General Wasantha Perera informed the court that the CID had subsequently lost contact with the same two witnesses whom it had previously stated were reachable.
High Court Judge Delivers Strong Rebuke
The conflicting position taken by the state investigating agency drew sharp criticism from Colombo High Court Judge Nadi Aparna Suwandurugoda. Addressing the court, the judge observed that the inconvenience caused to both the prosecution and the judiciary was not merely the result of an administrative lapse but appeared to have been “intentionally done by the CID with the aim of delaying the trial.”
The seriousness of the issue was further underscored by submissions made by President’s Counsel Sampath Mendis, appearing for the defence. He pointed out that one of the relevant witnesses had other pending legal proceedings in Sri Lanka, suggesting there remained a practical possibility of producing that individual before the court. Such conduct by investigative authorities in politically significant cases, he argued, once again highlights the need for broader reforms within the legal system and state institutions.
Trial Delayed as Court Orders Fresh Procedure
As a direct consequence of the CID’s conduct, the Colombo High Court was compelled to cancel the trial scheduled to commence on July 07.
The court subsequently directed that summons be formally issued to the relevant Indian nationals through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Justice in accordance with Judicial Service Commission Circular 358.
The sequence of events has once again highlighted concerns that delays within Sri Lanka’s justice delivery system are being compounded by failures in the implementation of proper institutional procedures by investigating authorities. The case has now been fixed for July 07, when the court will review the progress made under the newly ordered process.
