187th Day of the Main Easter Attack Trial – HC (TAB) 2972/21
Date: 15th May 2026|
Venue: Special Permanent Three-Judge High Court (Trial-at-Bar), 2nd Floor, MCC Building, Adhikarana Mawatha, Colombo 12.
The matter was taken up before the Trial-at-Bar. All accused were present, except the 17th accused, who had passed away, and the 13th accused. The 12th and 13th accused were represented by Counsel. The 18th accused was represented by Mr. Kaneel Maddumage, AAL.
In relation to the voir dire inquiry of the 18th accused, Prosecution Witness No. 2119, Director of the TID, Upul Lasantha Rathnayake, appeared before Court to testify regarding a statement allegedly made to him on 17th June 2021 by the 18th accused, Rasik Rasa Huzen, under Section 16(1) of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act, No. 48 of 1979 (PTA), while the witness was serving as an Assistant Superintendent of Police attached to the Criminal Investigation Department.
Accordingly, Witness No. 2119 testified before Court that on 11th June 2021 he received a letter from the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department informing him that the 18th accused wished to make a statement before a senior officer and requesting him to take necessary action and report progress. Witness No. 2119 further testified that on 12th June 2021 he informed the Officer-in-Charge of the Criminal Investigation Department that the 18th accused wished to make a statement before a senior officer and requested him to produce the 18th accused together with a translator.
Witness No. 2119 further testified that at approximately 11:25 hours on 14th June 2021, the 18th accused was brought to his office situated on the 2nd floor of the Butani Building, and that at that time the accused informed him that he wished to make a statement disclosing all that he had done with Mohomed Saharan. The witness testified that he explained to the accused the implications of making a statement under Section 16(1) of the PTA and provided the 18th accused with two photocopies in Tamil of Section 16(1) of the PTA and Section 24 of the Evidence Ordinance. The Tamil photocopy of Section 16(1) of the PTA and the Tamil photocopy of Section 24 of the Evidence Ordinance, signed by the 18th accused, were, with leave of Court, marked as P804 and P805 respectively. Witness No. 2119 further testified that he afforded the 18th accused time to reconsider his decision to make such a statement.
Witness No. 2119 further testified that at approximately 08:35 hours on 17th June 2021, the 18th accused was brought to his office with a translator, at which time the accused reiterated his intention to make a statement under Section 16(1) of the PTA, and that even on that day he advised the accused to further reflect on his decision to make such a statement. Witness No. 2119 testified that on 17th June 2021, after producing the accused before a Judicial Medical Officer under Medico-Legal Examination Form (MLEF) No. 1/2021, the accused was brought to his office, where the statement given by the accused was typed in his official chamber.
At this stage, the Police copy of MLEF No. 1/2021 was, with leave of Court, marked as P806. The Prosecution further sought to mark the statement allegedly made by the 18th accused on 17th June 2021 before Assistant Superintendent of Police Upul Lasantha Rathnayake under Section 16(1) of the PTA as P807.
At that point, Counsel for the 18th accused objected to the marking of the said document, contending that the 18th accused had never made any such statement before Assistant Superintendent of Police Upul Lasantha Rathnayake. On these three grounds, Counsel opposed the marking of the document as P807. In response, Court observed that it was necessary to conduct a voir dire inquiry to determine the voluntariness of the alleged statement said to have been made by the 18th accused on 17th June 2021 under Section 16(1) of the PTA. Accordingly, the eleven-page document containing the said statement was, with leave of Court, marked temporarily as R01.
Following the conclusion of the examination-in-chief, the testimony of Witness No. 2119 was translated into Tamil for all accused in terms of Section 271 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No. 15 of 1979, after which Counsel for the 18th accused proceeded to cross-examine the witness, suggesting that the witness had given false evidence before Court, that the letter dated 11th June 2021 was a fabricated document, and that the accused had never been brought to the witness’s office on 17th June 2021. Counsel for the 18th accused marked two documents as 18VD(01) and 18VD(02). Witness No. 2119 was further cross-examined by the 4th accused and the 9th accused. Thereafter, Witness No. 2119 was re-examined by the Prosecution.
Counsel for the 18th accused informed Court that they intended to call the 18th accused’s mother, Ameena, and Police Sergeant 8507 Pushpakumara as witnesses on behalf of the 18th accused.
The matter was fixed to be called again on 18th May 2026 at 10.00 a.m. for further trial.
