Gammampila admits in front of his wife and daughter that he made up stories about Ranga's death.

It has been revealed through testimonies given by the wife, daughter, cousin, and politician Udaya Gammanpila before Kuliyapitiya Magistrate Mihil Chiranthan Satharasinghe, during the inquest held yesterday (20) regarding the mysterious death of Mr. Ranga Nishantha Rajapaksa, who was an active director of the Department of Foreign Resources at the Ministry of Finance and was suspended from work.

There, the deceased's wife Nishshanka Arachchilage Seelawathi, daughter Abeysinghe Mudiyanselage Sunethmi Imasha, Rajapaksha's Karunawathi, Pathiraja Mudiyanselage Madhushani, and Pivithuru Hela Urumaya leader Udaya Prabath Gammanpila expressed facts about this from various angles. It is noteworthy that the deceased Ranga's wife stated in front of Udaya Gammanpila, who had specifically raised suspicions about the death by holding press conferences, that she had no suspicion about the death and described how she was inconvenienced by stories fabricated by some.
They also admitted in front of him that Mr. Udaya Gammanpila had stated some facts in a 'fictional' manner.

The prosecution in the Magistrate's inquiry was led by Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police for the North Western Province, Attorney-at-Law Ajith Rohana.

Testimony of the deceased's wife

Mrs. Nishshanka Arachchilage Seelawathi, the wife of the deceased Mr. Ranga Nishantha Rajapaksa, further stated the following while giving testimony at the inquest.

Witness: “Sir, this incident happened on April 30th. As usual, that morning I prepared breakfast for my daughter and my husband who was at home, and then left for school. I went to school for teaching as usual. We were preparing to go to the Temple of the Tooth in Kandy. So, I came home around ten in the morning. By the time I arrived, it was around ten fifty. I asked my daughter if she had eaten. My daughter said, 'I ate, but Dad didn't.' Since my husband wasn't visible, I asked my daughter where Dad was. My daughter said, 'Mom, Dad went downstairs saying he was going to pick cashews.' I went downstairs to look for my husband. I went to the back, but my husband wasn't there.

After that, I called Udaya aiya, a friend of both my husband's and my family. Udaya aiya came after a while. Both of us went to look for my husband. Then Ranweera aiya, who was working in the betel cultivation, also came to help us. We went towards the paddy field where my husband worked, but he wasn't there either.

After that, Karuna akka, who was working in the betel cultivation, sent us a message saying that my husband had fallen in the middle of the garden. We quickly went there. When we arrived, we saw my husband lying face up in the middle of the garden. I was very scared. With the help of the people who were there, I lifted my husband and brought him to the shed behind the kitchen. Then I called the 1990 ambulance service. They were the ones who, after examination, said that my husband had passed away.”

Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police Ajith Rohana: What clothes was the witness's husband wearing when he fell?
Witness: My husband was wearing a dark colored sarong and a yellowish T-shirt. He was also wearing a pair of Bata-type sandals with a coconut tree emblem.

Police: (Showing the exhibits to the witness) Are these the clothes of the witness's husband?
Witness: Yes, Sir. These are my husband's clothes and sandals.

Police: (Pointing to a knife, an exhibit) Does the witness recognize this knife?
Witness: Yes, Sir, even when I got married and came to this house, this was the knife used to cut vegetables and other things at home.

Police: Did you give statements to the police about this incident?
Witness: Yes, Sir, I gave two statements. After that, I went to the police again and gave another statement. Various media outlets asked me different things about this death. That caused us distress, both me and everyone in my family. That's why I went to the police for the third time and requested them to prevent it.

Police: In any of the three statements you gave to the police, did you ever say that you had any suspicion about this death?
Witness: I never said anywhere, at any time, that I had any suspicion about my husband's death.

Police: You can make another statement regarding that. Is there anything new you want to say about it in this honorable court?
Witness: We have no suspicion whatsoever. And there is nothing to say.

Testimony of the deceased's daughter

The deceased's daughter, who testified here, said the following.

Witness: “Sir, this is my father who passed away. We were preparing to go to the Temple of the Tooth that day. Mom went to school around seven in the morning. Before Mom left, she called me and told me to eat and give some to Dad too. I woke up around seven thirty and went to check on Dad, but he wasn't there. Mom came home around ten forty-five. After arriving, Mom went to bathe. After bathing, she came and asked me where Dad was. I told Mom that Dad said he was going down to the garden to pick cashews and then left. Mom went to look for Dad.

Later, Uncle Udaya came home. Mom and Uncle Udaya went towards the paddy field to look for Dad. A little while later, we heard a loud scream. When I went out to the back and looked, I heard Mom and Uncle Udaya screaming. When I went there, I saw Dad had fallen. Mom, along with all the uncles and aunts who were there, lifted Dad and brought him home. After that, they called the ambulance. They were the ones who came, checked, and said that Dad had passed away.”

Police: Did you hear any sound when you were alone at home?
Witness: No, I didn't hear any sound. I gave a statement about this to the police and signed it.

Testimony of Mrs. Karunawathi

Karunawathi, a relative who first saw the deceased fallen, then testified before the court.

Witness: “Sir, I live about 15 kilometers away from where Ranga malli resides. Although my husband and I didn't often come to this plot to pick betel, we did come to the betel cultivation every other day recently. That day, Ranga malli's wife came and said that her husband was not home. After that, my husband, that younger sister, and Udaya malli went to look for Ranga malli.”

Police: From the time you arrived for work in the morning until then, did you hear any suspicious sound?
Witness: “No, Sir, I didn't hear any such sound. If we had been picking betel in the usual area where we pick betel, we would have seen Ranga malli going there. On the day of the incident, we were picking betel on the other side of the garden, so we didn't see anything.”

Testimony of Mr. Udaya Gammanpila

Subsequently, testimony was taken from Mr. Udaya Gammanpila, the leader of Pivithuru Hela Urumaya.

Police: Witness, did you hold a press conference a few days after this incident, specifically on the fourth, and state that this death was suspicious?
Witness: 'Sir, I never publicized such a statement. All I did was quote a part of an appointment letter issued by the Director General of Health Services, a highly responsible state official in the country, for the appointment of four specialist judicial medical officers for the post-mortem examination related to this death.

Police: A post-mortem examination is not a judicial process. As an attorney, do you know about that, witness?
Witness: I work in civil courts, not criminal courts.

Here, Attorney-at-Law Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, appearing for witness Udaya Gammanpila, stated the following:
Attorney: Sir, various opinions regarding this death were published in several media outlets, including social media. Our legal team is surprised by the summoning of our client for testimony in this inquest.

Police: The press conference called by this witness was broadcast on the news channels of two television stations on the 4th and the following day. An opinion about the deceased was presented there. Therefore, he was summoned to court to obtain testimony under Section 370 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Here, parts of CD discs containing video footage related to that media conference were named as evidence for the prosecution).

Police: Is it correct that the deceased here was the person who made the initial complaint regarding the disappearance of eighty million rupees from the General Treasury?
Witness: Initially, based on information from reliable sources, I learned that the initial complaint was made by the deceased. This was confirmed by the Deputy Minister of Finance in a statement made in Parliament. Therefore, I made that statement. Later, after it was confirmed that the deceased was not the one who made the initial complaint, I held a press conference about that as well.

Police: What was the basis for stating in the press conference that this was a suicide, even before sending the blood-stained knife to the Government Analyst and obtaining a report?
Witness: This incident is based on a massive issue in the country. After I held the press conference, and even before it, various stories circulated in society about whether this person was killed or died naturally. If it had been stated that it was a suicide after the investigation was completed, no problem would have arisen. I did not state anything about the inquest.



Police: Did you also mention in the press conference that the fingerprints on the knife had not been sent to the Government Analyst?
Witness: I admit that I said so at the press conference.

Police: Do you know that doctors state that a fingerprint report is not very important in a post-mortem examination involving dissection of the body?
Witness: I stated my opinion. If the Deputy Inspector General of Police does not accept that opinion, I respect that.

Police: Did you make a statement in the press conference about the bloodstains on the clothes? Did you see those bloodstains?
Witness: All I said was that if there were bloodstains on the deceased's clothes, they should be examined. I am a lawyer. And a politician. A party leader. Currently, someone representing the opposition. A social media activist. Many matters held by state officials cannot be publicized by them through the media. Therefore, they get opposition politicians to publicize very sensitive confidential information. Many reliable state officials also told me a lot of information about this incident. The relevant press conference was held based on that information as well.

Police: Why did you present facts at that media conference stating that the wife said the deceased's death was suspicious?
Witness: I never, at any point, said that the wife stated the death was suspicious. In the appointment letter for the medical board appointed to conduct the post-mortem examination of that death, the Director General of Health Services had noted in English that such an appointment was made because the wife expressed suspicion about the death. (The witness drew the court's attention to that letter). Sir, shouldn't the police have inquired why the Director General of Health Services said so, instead of summoning me for testimony?

The court adjourned further testimony in this inquest until June 6, and ordered the police to present the witnesses on that day.