The Supreme Court on Thursday granted special leave to appeal to former Deputy Minister Shantha Premaratne, who was convicted of soliciting and accepting a Rs. 50,000 bribe in exchange for a promised job at the Ceylon Electricity Board.
A bench of Justices Achala Wengappuli, Arjuna Obeyesekere and Gihan Kulatunga granted leave in his petition against the Court of Appeal’s judgment, the Daily Mirror reported. Hiru News reported that leave was granted on the question of whether the charge against him was fairly proved.
Preliminary objections in the appeal have been fixed for 29 March 2027, according to Hiru.
A Rs. 50,000 case now in its twentieth year
The alleged offence dates to 2007, in the Ampara District. The Bribery Commission’s case was that Premaratne took Rs. 50,000 from a party supporter on a promise of employment at the Ceylon Electricity Board for a relative of hers.
Premaratne denied it, saying the money was a donation towards building the party’s district headquarters in Ampara that year.
The High Court convicted him in 2017 after a lengthy trial and sentenced him to four years’ rigorous imprisonment, Hiru reports. The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction on 5 November 2024. Thursday’s order means the Supreme Court will now examine that judgment.
Set end to end, the sequence is the story:
| Stage | Date | Elapsed |
|---|---|---|
| Alleged bribe, Ampara | 2007 | — |
| High Court conviction, 4 years RI | 2017 | 10 years |
| Court of Appeal upholds | 5 Nov 2024 | 7 years |
| Supreme Court grants special leave | 15 Oct 2026 | ~2 years |
| Preliminary objections to be heard | 29 Mar 2027 | 5 months |
By the time the Supreme Court hears preliminary objections — not the appeal itself — the matter will be 20 years old, and the sum at the centre of it remains Rs. 50,000. Neither filing comments on the elapsed time.
Premaratne held the portfolios of Tourism and Aviation, Irrigation and Water Resources Management, and Plan Implementation and Parliamentary Affairs. The Daily Mirror describes him as a UPFA party organiser; Hiru identifies him as a former SLFP deputy minister. The two labels are compatible — the SLFP was the principal constituent of the UPFA alliance — but no filing states which he held office under.
Counsel Hafeel Farisz appeared for the petitioner with Sanjeewa Kodithuwakku; Hiru also names Prashan Wickramaratne on the same side. Additional Director General Ruvini Wickramasinghe appeared for the Bribery Commission.
Not reported
Neither filing says whether Premaratne has served any part of the four-year sentence, whether he was bailed pending appeal, or whether the sentence is currently suspended — which determines whether Thursday’s order changes his liberty at all.
The two outlets describe the intended beneficiary of the promised job differently: the Daily Mirror says the complainant’s son-in-law, while Hiru’s wording indicates a brother-in-law. Neither names the complainant or the beneficiary.
Hiru frames the petition as an appeal against the prison sentence, while the Daily Mirror frames it as against the Court of Appeal’s judgment as a whole. The order does not make clear whether conviction, sentence or both are open on the appeal. It is also not reported why the Court of Appeal stage took seven years, or what is expected to be raised in the preliminary objections now fixed for 2027.
Sources: Daily Mirror, Hiru News.
