Nandasena Gotabhaya Rajapaksa vs Arumugam Veeraraj Siriniwasa Watte – CA HCA 06/2011-2011

In the case between Nandasena Gotabhaya Rajapaksa (Petitioner) and Arumugam Veeraraj (Petitioner-Respondent), with respondents including Major General Mahinda Hathurusinghe and others, the court addressed whether a Magistrate must exercise judicial mind and specify reasons before issuing witness summons, and whether such a summons could lawfully be issued against the sitting President of Sri Lanka, given constitutional immunity under Article 35. The court held that issuance of a summons requires a clear statement of purpose and must not be a mechanical process, and affirmed that a sitting President is afforded absolute immunity from such proceedings. This decision reaffirmed the principle that judicial powers must be exercised with due process and that constitutional safeguards for the Pre