No bail for House of Fashions owner

The bail application submitted by Priyalal Bandula Preethi Jayawardena, the owner of the well-known apparel sales company House of Fashions, who is currently remanded on charges of violating the Customs Ordinance, has been rejected by Colombo Additional Magistrate Oshada Migara Maharachchi. Accordingly, the court ordered the suspect to be further remanded until August 06.

The Magistrate declared that the preliminary objection raised by the defense, stating that the complaint filed by the Customs Authority could not be proceeded with, was baseless, and also rejected the request to dismiss the complaint.

Since the value of the charges against the accused suspect exceeds one million rupees, the Magistrate pointed out that the Magistrate's Court does not have the power to grant bail according to the provisions of the Customs Ordinance, and stated that the High Court should be approached to obtain bail. Furthermore, considering the facts presented by the prosecution, there is a sufficient case for investigation, therefore, the court also rejected the defense's request to release the suspect under Section 115 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Deputy Solicitor General, President's Counsel Shanil Kularatne, appearing for the prosecution in this case, objected to granting bail and stated that the suspect has not provided adequate cooperation for customs investigations, and that information regarding several other offenses was revealed after his arrest. He further stated that although money had been sent to import goods through a Chinese company, it has not yet been confirmed what goods have been imported, and that although 30 local institutions had invested money with the relevant Chinese supplier, no goods had been received in the country. The Deputy Solicitor General also informed the court that a full investigation is now required regarding the import of goods worth over 500 million rupees.

President's Counsel Nalin Ladduwahetty and Attorney Chaminda Athukorala, appearing for the defense, presented facts before the court, filing objections against the prosecution and requesting that their client be released on bail or acquitted due to insufficient evidence. However, after considering the arguments of both parties, the Magistrate ruled that he did not have the legal authority to grant bail to the suspect and rejected the defense's requests, and ordered both parties to report further information related to the incident to the court on August 06.