– Three senior legal professionals have filed a writ petition before the Court of Appeal seeking urgent intervention to prevent a sitting High Court Judge from being summoned and questioned regarding judicial decisions made in the course of his official duties, arguing that such action poses a serious threat to judicial independence and the rule of law.

The petition has been filed by President’s Counsel Uditha Egalahewa, President’s Counsel Farman Cassim and Senior Counsel Sugath Caldera. The respondents are Colombo High Court Judge Udesh Ranatunga, the Attorney General and Avissawella High Court Judge Sahana Mapa Bandara.

When the matter was called before Court of Appeal President Rohantha Abeysuriya and Justice Priyantha K. Fernando, the Court issued an interim order staying all proceedings connected to the summons and preventing any further steps from being taken to compel the judge’s appearance, pending the final determination of the application. The Court also issued notices on the respondents, returnable for June 12.According to the petition, High Court Judge Mapa Bandara had been summoned to appear before the Colombo High Court in connection with a High Court case. The petitioners claim they have credible grounds to believe that the purpose of the summons is to question the judge regarding judicial orders he had made while serving as the District Judge of Nugegoda.

The petitioners further state that Judge Mapa Bandara’s name was not included in the original list of witnesses attached to the indictment filed in February 2025, but was subsequently added to an additional witness list filed in March 2026, where he was identified as District Judge, Nugegoda. They contend that judicial officers enjoy immunity in respect of their judicial acts and that decisions made by judges can only be challenged through appellate or revisionary procedures recognized by law. The petition argues that judicial determinations should not be subjected to collateral scrutiny before another court exercising original jurisdiction.

The petitioners warn that permitting judges to be summoned and questioned regarding the reasoning, propriety or exercise of judicial discretion in cases heard by them would create a chilling effect on judicial independence and undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.Dr. Romesh de Silva PC with Ikram Mohamed PC, Manohara de Silva PC, Rohan Sahabandu PC, Sanjeewa Jayawardena PC, Saliya Pieris PC, N.R. Sivendran, Niran Anketel and Pasindu Bandara instructed by Sanath Wijewardane Associates appeared for the petitioners.