123th Day of the Main Easter Attack Trial – HC (TAB) 2972/21
Date: 18 Dec 2025 |
Venue: Special Trial-at-Bar, Colombo 07
The case was taken up before the Trial-at-Bar with all accused present, except for the 17th accused, who had passed away. All parties were represented. The 7th, 8th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 19th, and 20th witnesses named in the additional witness list were present before Court, and prosecution witnesses numbered 7, 8, 12, and 13 were temporarily released.
It was marked as an admission under section 420 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979 that, while on duty on 31st October 2019 at 10.35 a.m., a Medico-Legal Examination Form (MLEF) bearing No. 167/19 was issued for the purpose of producing the 15th accused before the Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) and was handed over to Police Constable Liyanage (No. 87100), and that after the 15th accused was produced before the JMO together with Police Inspector Sugath, the accused was brought back and handed over to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) at 1.40 p.m. on the same day.
PW14, Police Constable Liyanage (No. 87100), was called to give evidence. He testified that he served at the Special Investigation Unit 2 of the CID from 2010 to 2022, and that, on the order of the Officer-in-Charge of SIU Unit 2, Chief Inspector Marasinghe, he was assigned the duty of producing the 15th accused before the JMO on 31st October 2019. He further testified that at 10.35 a.m. on that day, Officer Nirosha handed over the 15th accused together with MLEF No. 167/19 to him, and that he, together with Police Inspector Sugath, took the 15th accused to the JMO, Dr. K. Vasutheva, at the National Hospital, Colombo. He further testified that while transporting the 15th accused to the JMO, the accused remained in his custody, and neither he nor Police Inspector Sugath exerted any influence, threats, or offered any promises to the 15th accused. He testified that if the 15th accused had been subjected to any such influence, there would have been no obstacle preventing the accused from informing him. The witness, PW14, also testified that there were no externally visible injuries on the 15th accused, and that after being produced before the JMO, the accused was returned to the CID at 1.40 p.m. on the same day. PW14 then identified the 15th accused in Court.
During cross-examination, it was suggested by the defence that PW14 was unaware of the specific reason for which the 15th accused was presented before the JMO on 31 October 2019, and that the PW14 was therefore providing false evidence in Court. It was further suggested that, under the pretext of taking the 15th accused for medical treatment, the witness, PW14, had taken him without allowing him the opportunity to receive treatment and presented him before the JMO. The defence also suggested that the office of the JMO and the general hospital were distinct locations, and although the 15th accused was taken to receive treatment, no treatment was in fact provided to him on that day. Moreover, it was suggested that PW14 had detained the 15th accused for approximately two hours prior to presenting him to the JMO on 31st October 2019, and that during this period the witness had made a phone call to the 15th accused’s wives. PW14 rejected all of these suggestions and stated that the 15th accused informed him of his desire to make a phone call to his wives only after being presented before the JMO. The defence suggested that the 15th accused had informed PW14 of his wish to make the call before being presented to the JMO, and that he was presented before the JMO without his consent and against his wishes. It was further suggested by the defence that the 15th accused was presented before the JMO merely to show that he had not been subjected to any assault or influence. PW14 rejected all of these suggestions.
Upon re-examination, PW14 testified that he was not authorized to make any decision on his own regarding taking the 15th accused for treatment, and that there was no necessity to present him before the JMO in the absence of a need for treatment. He further testified that he was never informed that the accused was under any duress, and that the 15th accused had not requested to make a telephone call to his wives prior to being presented before the JMO.
PW19, S.W. Gunasekare was called to give evidence. Documents temporarily marked C01 and C03 were given to the witness. PW19 testified that the document marked C01 was typed by her on 26th September 2019 in relation to case No. B11330/18, and that the document marked C03 was typed by her on 1st November 2019 in relation to the same case. PW19 further stated that both documents contained statements made by the 15th accused before the Hon. Magistrate, Mawanella, and that these statements were recorded in the official chamber of the Hon. Magistrate. PW19 also testified that, according to these documents, on both 26th September 2019 and 1st November 2019, the 15th accused was produced before the Hon. Magistrate by Sub-Inspector Dias and Police Sergeant Wijerathne, and that on both occasions, the 15th accused gave his statement in Sinhala. PW19 further testified that in the document marked C03, the name of Sub-Inspector Dias was typed as the officer who produced the 15th accused before the Hon. Magistrate on 1st November 2019 and stated that this was a typographical error on her part, and that she clearly remembered that it was not Sub-Inspector Dias who attended on that day. However, PW19 also testified that she did not know the name of the officer who was actually present on that date.
During cross-examination, PW19 testified that she became aware of an error in the document she had typed on 1st November 2019 only today, while reviewing the document. The defence suggested that PW19 was giving evidence in Court based on assumptions. PW19 rejected this suggestion and was not re-examined by the prosecution.
PW20, the typist at the Magistrate’s Court, Mawanella, Nimali Withanage, was called to give evidence. Documents temporarily marked C02 and C2A were given to the witness. PW20 testified that both C02 and C2A were typed by her on 18th October 2019 in relation to case No. B11330/18, and that both documents contained statements made by the 15th accused before the Hon. Magistrate, Mawanella, on 18th October 2019. PW20 further testified that these statements were recorded in the official chamber of the Hon. Magistrate, Mawanella, and that the document marked C2A was the original copy containing the statement given by the 15th accused on that date.
During cross-examination, it was suggested that the PW20 was giving false evidence before the Court, and that on 18th October 2019, while giving his statement, the 15th accused was referring to a piece of paper in his hand.
Upon re-examination, PW20 testified that she was confident that the 15th accused did not have any piece of paper in his hand while giving his statement on 18th October 2019. She further testified that she did not see the 15th accused possessing any such paper, and that during the recording of the statement, both she and the 15th accused were seated in a position clearly visible to the Hon. Magistrate.
PW18, the JMO, Dr. K. Vasutheva, was connected to give evidence via Zoom from the High Commission in Pretoria, South Africa. The Court was informed that the provisions under the Assistance to and Protection of Victims of Crime and Witnesses Act, No. 10 of 2023, Sections 82(1)(b), 82(2)(a), and 84, had been properly complied with. Thiloka Sulochani Perera, First Secretary (Commercial) at the High Commission in Pretoria, South Africa, facilitated PW18’s evidence via Zoom and, by responding to preliminary questions first asked by the Court, verified the identity of JMO, Dr. K. Vasutheva. She further confirmed that he was the relevant JMO competent and willing to give evidence in relation to this case. PW18 was not cross-examined by the defence.
PW18 was shown a document marked C04 and testified that on 24th September 2019, the 15th accused was presented to him along with the MLEF No. 155/19. He further stated that, in accordance with the information in C04, he prepared and submitted a Medico-Legal Report (MLR) to the Court on 15th December 2025. Accordingly, the MLR corresponding to the MLEF No. 155/19, which had already been marked in Court as 15VD3 by the defence, was marked as C06 by the prosecution. PW18 also testified that the 15th accused informed him that, following his arrest by the Kegalle Police in connection with the Easter attack, he had been handed over to the CID. PW18 further testified that he examined the 15th accused and observed that he had no physical disability, and that there were no injuries, either fresh or healed, on his body. PW18 also testified that the 15th accused’s mental state was normal, he exhibited normal behavioral patterns, and that, based on his interactions with PW18, he did not appear to be under any duress.
PW18 was shown a document marked C05 and testified that on 31st October 2019, the 15th accused was presented to him along with MLEF No. 167/19. He further testified that, in accordance with the information in C05, he prepared and submitted a MLR to the Court on 15th December 2025. Accordingly, the MLR corresponding to MLEF No. 167/19, which had already been marked in Court as 15VD4, was marked as C07 by the prosecution. PW18 also testified that the 15th accused informed him that he had been assaulted by the police, however, the 15th accused did not provide details to PW18 regarding whether the assault was committed by officers of the Kegalle Police or the CID, nor did he specify the type or manner of the assault. PW18 testified that he examined the 15th accused and observed that there were no injuries on his body, no marks of injury resulting from assault, and no healed or fresh injuries. PW18 further testified that the 15th accused’s mental state was normal, which was confirmed through a Mini Mental State Examination.
During cross-examination, PW18 testified that, according to the document marked C04, on 24th September 2019 at 1.15 p.m., the 15th accused was produced before him by Police Sergeant Wijerathne, and that the corresponding MLR was prepared and submitted on 15th December 2025. The defence suggested that PW18 had prepared the MLR six years after the examination and that, ordinarily, the MLR should have been prepared and completed for submission to the Court at the earliest opportunity. It was further suggested that 15th accused had refused to provide certain details in the short history section because he had been given promises. The defence also suggested that the 15th accused had refused to answer questions posed by PW18 due to fear. Furthermore, the defence marked the statement “I was assaulted by the Police,” appearing in the short history section of the report marked C07, as 15VD4A.
Upon re-examination, PW18 testified that the 15th accused’s mental state was normal, that there were no signs of any assault on his body, and that there were no fresh, healing, or healed injuries.
Accordingly, the prosecution informed the Court that evidence had been recorded from all of the prosecution witnesses listed in the additional witness list relating to this Voir Dire inquiry.
The defence informed the Court that they intend to submit to both the Court and the prosecution a list of witnesses it expects to call and that they expect to obtain evidence-in-chief from the 15th accused.
The counsel for the 13th accused informed the Court that the 13th accused was required to attend a dental clinic on 19th December 2025 and, therefore, could not be produced before the Court on that day, and that there was no objection to proceeding with the Court proceedings in his absence.
The matter was fixed to be called again on 19th December 2025 at 10.00 a.m. for further trial.
