P. Kumararatnam, J.

1. The Suspect-Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner) filing this application has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court to grant bail to him upon suitable condition as this Court consider appropriate.

The Petitioner has been named as a Suspect in the case bearing No. B/1482/01/2024 in the Magistrate Court of Gampaha.

The Suspect was arrested on 10th June 2024 by the officers attached to the Immigration and Emigration upon a travel ban imposed by the court. Upon handed over to the 1st Respondent, investigations have been carried out by the police and filed the progress of the investigations under case No. B/1482/01/2024 in the Magistrate Court of Gampaha. On the 5th September 2024, the 1st Respondent filling further report, informed court that in consequence of the investigation, a grenade was recovered in the Katana Police Division on 11.06.2024. Thereafter, the Petitioner was detained under a detention order said to have been issued under Section 9(1) of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act No.48 of 1979.It was alleged that the Petitioner relates to or concerned in activities threatening the National Security and Public peace. It was further informed court that the investigations are being carried out regarding offences committed under Section 2(1) of the Prevention of terrorism Act (Temporary Provisions) Act No. 48 of 1979 as amended.

The Petitioner alleges that from very inception the 1st Respondent had failed to properly submit facts before the Court pertaining to the substantive case which had prompted the learned Magistrate to order the 1st Respondent to properly place facts before the court.

In this back drop as stated above, the Petitioner is languishing in remand custody for more than 20 months.

The Petitioner urged following grounds in support of his bail application.

                     1. More than 20 months have passed-by from the date of his arrest and up to date no any trial has begun.

                     2. Non-existence of a prima-facie case against him.

                     3. Non-tendering of synopsis of evidence against him as required by Section 115(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code up to date.

                     4. Blatant disregard of Section 9A of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act No. 48 of 1979 as amended depriving his entitlements under Section 9B of the said Act.

                     5. Non-discovery of any firearm or grenade from the exclusive possession of him.

                     6. He has no any previous convictions.

Learned State Counsel while objecting for bail, has submitted a list of pending cases against him. The list is re-produced below:





The Section 15 B of PTA (Amended) Act No. 12 of 2022 states:

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the provisions of this Act, if the trial against a person remanded or detained under this Act has not commenced after the expiration of twelve months, from the date of arrest, the Court of Appeal may release such person on bail, upon an application in that behalf, made by the suspect or an Attorney- at Law on his behalf:

Provided however, notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (2) of section 15, the High Court may in exceptional circumstances release the suspect on bail subject to such conditions as the High Court may deem fit:

Provided further, where the trial against an accused in respect of whom the indictment has been forwarded and filed in the High Court, has not commenced after the expiration of twelve months from the date of such filing, the High Court may consider to release such person on bail, upon an application in that behalf made by the accused or an Attorney- at-Law on his behalf.”

The Petitioner in his bail application although, stated of existing pending cases, but failed to disclose the list of pending cases against him. Since the Courts rely on the information provided by the parties, the duty of full disclosure is of great importance in legal proceedings, especially in bail application. Here the Courts rely heavily on the information provided in order to arrive at a fair and informed decision. Therefore, if a party withholds or misrepresents material or relevant facts, it can lead to an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of the case which will in turn will result in an unjust or unfair orders.

Courts discourage the suppression of material facts which not only misleads the court but also undermines the integrity of the judicial process and compromises their ability to arrive at just and equitable decisions.

In this bail application, the Petitioner has suppressed the list of pending cases which are very serious crimes. As the investigations are not over of the cases mentioned above, I think granting of bail is not justifiable in this case.

Hence, this bail application is dismissed.

The Registrar is directed to send this bail order to the Magistrate Court of Gampaha and the Officer-in-Charge, Western Province North Crime Division, Peliyagoda.