221st Day of the Main Easter Attack Trial – HC (TAB) 2972/21
Date: 06th July 2026|
Venue: Special Permanent Three-Judge High Court (Trial-at-Bar), 2nd Floor, MCC Building, Adhikarana Mawatha, Colombo 12.
On this date, the matter was taken up for the further evidence-in-chief of the 12th accused.
The 12th accused continued to give evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding his arrest, detention, alleged assaults while in custody, and the circumstances under which his alleged statement was obtained by the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID).
The 12th accused stated that following his arrest, he was assaulted and thereafter taken into the custody of the TID. He stated that he was produced before JMO Dr. Ajith Tennakoon, and that prior to being produced before the JMO, TID officers instructed him not to disclose any assaults and advised him to state that he had not been subjected to any harm. However, according to the accused, the JMO examined him and identified that he had been subjected to severe assault.
The accused further testified that after his production before the JMO, TID officers Dharanapriya and Chaturanga again assaulted him. He stated that in June 2019 he was transferred to the TID Unit situated at the Welisara Navy Camp, where he continued to remain in detention.
While detained at Welisara, the accused stated that TID officers repeatedly prepared typed statements and requested him to sign them. He stated that on one occasion, when he refused to sign a statement, Police Constable Atapattu, SI Madushan, and Police Constable Chaturanga allegedly assaulted him downstairs at the TID premises, resulting in him signing the document.
The accused further stated that he was produced before the Mount Lavinia Magistrate’s Court on 1st August 2019. According to him, the Magistrate informed the accused that there was no connection between them and the Easter Sunday attack. However, he stated that despite this observation, he was taken back to the Navy Camp and continued to be detained.
The accused stated that during his detention, an ICRC officer named Duncan visited him. He informed the officer that TID officers had pressured him to provide a confessional statement, but that he had refused to give such a statement.
The accused further testified regarding his production before ASP Bimshani Jayasinghearachchi. He stated that on 22nd October 2019, he was provided with copies of Section 24 of the Evidence Ordinance and Section 16(1) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), marked as P-917 and P-918, through Bimshani Jasinghaarachchi. He stated that these documents were provided only in Sinhala lnaguage. Since he was unable to write in Sinhala, he made the endorsement in English. He was also shown English photocopies marked as P-916 and P-915.
The accused stated that after providing his statement on 1st November 2019, ASP Bimshani obtained his signature on the photocopies marked P-916 and P-915. He further stated that before being produced before ASP Bimshani, he was produced before JMO Dr. K.K. Jooser and was threatened and pressured by Police Constable Atapattu and Police Constable Ashok to sign the statement.
According to the accused, ASP Bimshani Jayasinghearachchi and ASP Saman Perera were present at the TID office when he was produced. He stated that he was requested to sign a Sinhala typed confessionary statement. He refused to sign the document and requested an English copy, but such copy was not provided. He further stated that the provisions of Section 24 of the Evidence Ordinance and Section 16(1) of the PTA were not explained to him on that occasion.
The accused stated that on 9th November 2019, after being produced before JMO Dr. K.K. Jooser he was taken to the TID Headquarters. He stated that SI Nalaka, SI Madushan, and Police Constable Atapattu instructed him to give a statement. During this time, his wife, one-year-old child, mother, and father-in-law arrived at the TID Headquarters. He stated that his father-in-law advised him not to sign any document which he could not read or understand.
The accused alleged that SI Madushan threatened him by stating that if he refused to sign the statement, his family members would be arrested. He stated that due to this fear, he signed handwritten documents shown to him by ASP Bimshani Jayasinghearachchi. He maintained that the N1 statement was written in Sinhala and that the contents were neither read over nor explained to him.
The accused further stated that two days after signing the statement, he was produced before JMO Dr. Rool Haq, where he explained the circumstances under which his signature was obtained. He also stated that on 3rd December 2019, when he was produced before the Colombo Magistrate’s Court, he informed the Magistrate that his signature had been obtained forcibly.
Regarding his educational background, the accused stated that he studied at an international school in English medium. His G.C.E. Ordinary Level certificate containing a “W” grade for Sinhala Language was marked as 12VD3, while his school leaving certificate was marked as 12VD4. He stated that he could understand Sinhala to some extent but could not read or write Sinhala.
During cross-examination by the 9th accused, it was suggested that the accused could understand Sinhala. The accused admitted that he could understand Sinhala but denied that he could read and write Sinhala. It was further suggested that his signature had been forcibly obtained, which suggestion was admitted.
The 11th accused, appearing in person, thereafter cross-examined the witness. The accused stated that after his arrest he was subjected to torture, including being forced to walk on his knees on a rough floor and being assaulted. He stated that he did not informe his family because otherwise neither he nor his family could remain peaceful while he was in TID custody. He further confirmed that ASP-rank officers visited him during his detention.
During cross-examination by the Prosecution, the accused denied knowing the 4th and 9th accused persons prior to the incident and denied giving instructions to them regarding suggestions to be made on his behalf. He denied that he was capable of reading and writing Sinhala and denied the suggestion that his complaint regarding the obtaining of his signature by force was an afterthought.
During re-examination, counsel for the 12th accused questioned him regarding his Sinhala literacy at the time his signature was obtained on the N1 statement. The accused maintained that although he could understand Sinhala to some extent, he was unable to read or write Sinhala.
Thereafter, DW-12 – Shahid Mohammed Hussain Framsi was called to give evidence. The witness, who is the father-in-law of the 12th accused, stated that he was not permitted to enter and meet the accused while he was detained at the Welisara Navy Camp. However, he stated that the mother and wife of the accused were permitted to visit him. He further stated that he was permitted to visit the accused at the TID Headquarters.
The witness stated that the visiting day at the TID Welisara Unit was Saturday and the visiting day at the TID Headquarters was Sunday. He stated that on 9th November 2019, at approximately 9.00 a.m., he went to the TID Headquarters together with the mother, wife, and child of the 12th accused. According to the witness, officer Madushan requested them to advise the accused to sign the document for the future of his child.
The witness stated that they were taken to the conference room where he met the accused and advised him to sign only a document which he could read and understand in his own language. The witness further stated that after meeting him, the accused informed him that he had been forced to sign the document.
The witness further stated that when he later attended the Magistrate’s Court, the accused informed the Magistrate that his signature had been obtained forcibly. During cross-examination, the Prosecution suggested that the witness was falsely claiming to have entered the TID Headquarters and that only the mother and wife were permitted to enter. The witness denied this suggestion and maintained his position.
The witness also denied the suggestion that he had visited 12th accused on 12th May 2019 and denied misleading the Court. When questioned regarding how he remembered the date of 9th November 2019, he stated that a family wedding around that period and preparations connected with the occasion assisted him in remembering the date.
Following the conclusion of the evidence of DW-12, re-examination was conducted to clarify matters arising during cross-examination. Thereafter, DW-5, DW-6, DW-7, DW-8, DW-9, and DW-13 were summoned and released. Witnesses No. 2038 and No. 2043 were temporarily released.
The matter was thereafter adjourned and will be resumed for further trial on 7th July 2026 at 10.00 a.m.
