CID yet to report facts to court on detention of retired Major General Suresh Sallay

The Colombo Fort Magistrate Isuru Neththikumara stated yesterday that the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has not yet reported facts to Court regarding the retired Major General Suresh Sallay, who is currently being detained and questioned under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.   

The Magistrate made this observation when counsel appearing on behalf of the suspect filed a motion and sought clarification from Court.   

During the proceedings, the Magistrate inquired whether the CID had reported facts to Court in relation to this incident. The officer appearing on behalf of the CID informed Court that no such facts had been reported thus far.   

Counsel for the suspect submitted that Wednesday had been granted to meet their client, who is being detained and interrogated, to obtain instructions, and requested that an additional date be granted for the same purpose.   

Counsel further requested permission for the suspect to receive meals from his residence, citing alleged threats to his life due to services rendered to the Republic of Sri Lanka, and also sought access for his son to visit him.   

It was further submitted that the arrest had been carried out by officers of the CID on February 25, 2026. Following the arrest, the suspect had been taken to his residence. At that time, CID officers had stated that it was necessary to search the house. When his wife inquired whether a search warrant was available, officers had reportedly informed her that under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, a warrant was not required to conduct such a search.   

Counsel further informed Court that although CID officers entered the residence and carried out a full search, no female police officer had been present during the search.   

Counsel also requested that facilities be provided to enable confidential consultation between the suspect and his lawyers, and sought an order permitting food to be supplied from his residence. However, refusing to issue such orders, the Magistrate observed that since facts had not been reported to Court regarding the suspect, the requested relief could not be granted.   

Counsel further submitted that they had received instructions that the arrest and detention under detention orders had been effected without sufficient evidence being disclosed. They stated that legal proceedings were expected to be instituted challenging the detention order. In that regard, they requested a certified copy of the relevant case record, and of any other legal proceedings relating to the investigation, as required for the intended action. The Magistrate considered the request and granted permission for the issuance of a certified copy of the relevant case record.   

Additionally, counsel informed Court that they had received instructions giving rise to reasonable suspicion that there may be attempts to cause harm to the suspect’s life by removing him from CID custody. Accordingly, they requested an order directing that the suspect not be taken outside the CID premises during the period of the detention order without prior permission of Court.