148th Day of the Main Easter Attack Trial – HC (TAB) 2972/21
Date: 27th February 2026|
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.
The 4th accused submitted to Court a list of witnesses he intends to call on his behalf. Today, P.W. 1773, retired SSP Ajith Kavinda Piyasekara, was called for re-examination. He informed the court that on 11th September 2020 a letter had been received by the Director General stating that the 4th accused wished to meet a senior officer. It was further stated that on the same date, Senior Superintendent of Police Prasanna Alwis had instructed P.W. 1773 to attend to matters relating to the 4th accused.
The prosecution sought the court’s permission to question the witness by showing him two documents titled the “Inward Registry” and “Outward Registry,” which were maintained in the office of the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department. At that stage, the 9th accused objected on the basis that those documents had not been previously marked in court. The prosecution responded that the documents were being produced to clarify matters that had been raised by the defence during cross-examination. Accordingly, the page containing entry number 8837 dated 11th September 2020 in the Inward Registry was marked as P184, and the page containing entry number 9495 dated 25th September 2020 in the Outward Registry was marked as P185.
In his evidence, P.W. 1773 stated that on 14th September 2020 the 4th accused had informed that he wished to make a confession, and that the 4th accused was again called on 23rd September 2020 and asked whether he was ready to make the statement. He further stated that the 4th accused eventually gave the statement on 4th October 2020. P.W. 1773 further testified that Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not state that a signature must be placed on every page when recording a statement. He also stated that when the 4th accused came to his office to give the statement, he appeared to be relaxed and was not experiencing any difficulty.
The accused were then given the opportunity to question the witness regarding the documents marked as P184 and P185 today. During this stage, the 4th accused suggested that the document from which P.W. 1773 was giving evidence in court was not a record of letters received by him, and that it was not a document in the custody of the witness. It was further suggested that P.W. 1773 was giving evidence about a document that was not in his custody, had not been recorded by him, had not been under his control, and had not even been examined by him before. Subsequently, the 9th accused suggested that P.W. 1773 was giving false evidence by taking a position different from his earlier stance when testifying about a document that he had not previously seen.
Thereafter, as the 4th accused did not have legal representation, he was called upon to give a statement as evidence regarding his position that the statement allegedly given by him had not been made voluntarily. In his statement, the 4th accused testified that he had no necessity to make a statement under Section 16(1) of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act, No. 48 of. 1979.
The matter was fixed to be called again on 3rd March 2026 at 10.00 a.m. for further trial.
