Former Director of the State Intelligence Service (SIS), Retired Major General Suresh Salley—currently detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA)—faces allegations directly linked to the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, Colombo Fort Magistrate Isuru Neththikumara said in court today.
The Magistrate noted that the matters before the court do not concern dereliction of duty or unrelated issues, but rather allegations of direct connections to the Easter Sunday bombings.
The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) presented a progress report on its ongoing investigation into the attacks before the Colombo Fort Magistrate’s Court.
According to the CID, investigations have uncovered several alleged links between Salley and the Easter Sunday terror attacks. Investigators told court that Salley had allegedly gathered intelligence on the activities of Zahran Hashim’s group prior to the attack on St. Sebastian’s Church in Katuwapitiya, using one of his informants.
Informant and Intelligence Operations
Reading from an investigation officer’s statement, the CID said the intelligence unit maintained an informant in the Panadura area who had provided advance warning of the attack.
According to the statement, the informant claimed that an Army officer with more than 20 years of experience was behind the plot. Senior Army officers later questioned him extensively over the phone. On April 26, 2019, the informant was taken into custody by Military Intelligence and subsequently handed over to the Terrorism Investigation Division (TID).
The CID further stated that the informant’s household expenses were allegedly covered by Military Intelligence after his detention, and arrangements were made for his son to receive employment within the Army Intelligence IT division.
The Magistrate observed that while intelligence officers are legally permitted to maintain informants, concern arises if such support continues after the individual becomes a suspect.
When questioned by the court, CID officers confirmed that the suspect continued to receive support and described how Salley was allegedly connected to this process.
Investigators told court that these actions were carried out under the guidance of the suspect. They also stated that after the individual was released on the advice of the Attorney General, he was handed over to TID officers, taken to the Galadari Hotel, thanked for his cooperation, and told to withdraw from further involvement.
The Magistrate questioned why the individual had been thanked.
In response, CID officers said the informant had been assigned to the TID for questioning and that an intelligence officer had been tasked with obtaining details from him about the progress of the investigation, including how the CID and TID were conducting inquiries and how foreign investigators were involved.
Alleged Interference in Investigations
The CID also informed court that Salley had allegedly interfered in efforts to confirm the death of Pulastini Rajendran, also known as Sarah Jasmine, who was linked to the Easter attacks.
According to investigators, Sarah Jasmine was believed to have died in the April 26, 2019 explosion in Sainthamaruthu, but her body was never recovered. A DNA confirmation of her death was obtained only after a third test, with investigators claiming they faced pressure from the suspect during the process.
The CID further told court that former Inspector General of Police C.D. Wickramaratne and former CID Director Nishantha Soysa have already provided testimony regarding alleged interference, stating that Salley repeatedly influenced officials through discussions at the National Security Council.
The Magistrate questioned how an intelligence officer could summon the head of the Police to the National Security Council. CID officers responded that such meetings could only be convened by the President, based on presentations made by the Director of State Intelligence.
The CID also cited a statement from former CID officer Prasad Ranasinghe, who alleged that he was summoned before the National Security Council and pressured through the President after failing to carry out instructions attributed to Salley. According to investigators, Ranasinghe later suffered a heart attack due to the stress caused by these events.
Defence Challenges Allegations
President’s Counsel Anuja Premaratne, appearing for Salley, rejected the allegations in court.
He argued that the bombing occurred in 2019 and questioned the relevance of revisiting the Katuwapitiya incident. Premaratne also stated that the individual referred to as the third suspect was not in Sri Lanka at the time but in Malaysia.
He further challenged claims that Salley had pressured senior police officers, including Deputy Inspectors General and the Inspector General of Police.
Premaratne also argued that the State Intelligence Service operates under the IGP and questioned how an Army intelligence officer could address the National Security Council. He added that the council could only be convened by the President and claimed that no such meeting took place during the Easter attacks in 2019. He said these matters had already been discussed before a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court.
Questions Over Presidential Authority
The Magistrate also questioned CID officers about the nature of the pressure allegedly exerted by the President at the time.
Investigators responded that the pressure involved instructions to exhume bodies in Ampara for a third time in order to obtain DNA samples. According to the CID, the suspect repeatedly raised this issue during intelligence review meetings and later brought it before the National Security Council, alleging that CID officers were deliberately avoiding the test.
Meanwhile, President’s Counsel Premaratne informed the court that lawyers representing Salley had encountered several obstacles when attempting to meet their client, who remains detained under the PTA.
Court Order
After considering submissions from both sides, the Fort Magistrate ordered that the case be recalled on the 25th.
In his remarks, the Magistrate stated that the allegations against the third suspect appear to relate directly to the Easter Sunday attacks rather than peripheral matters such as dereliction of duty.
However, he noted that whether the available evidence is sufficient must be determined based on the consolidated evidence report presented to court and the outcome of further investigations.
The Magistrate also said that one of the issues raised concerns actions taken through the National Security Council. He noted that if an order was issued by the President through the council within the scope of constitutional authority, it would not automatically amount to a criminal offence.
He stated that criminal liability would arise only if there was clear intent to obstruct an investigation, adding that providing advice regarding investigative steps does not in itself constitute a criminal act.
The court ordered that further findings be submitted and said any applications relating to the third suspect must be presented in writing in accordance with previous appellate court orders.
The Magistrate added that the court would also review matters related to the suspect’s detention under the Prevention of Terrorism Act within the limits of the Constitution.
With the inputs from News First