No Decision at Present to Arrest Varuna Jayasundara; Attorney General Informs Court
14-Jun-2026.
The Attorney General informed the Court of Appeal on June 12 that, based on the information revealed thus far through the ongoing investigations into the Easter Sunday terrorist attacks, no decision has been taken to arrest or detain Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police (SDIG) Varuna Jayasundara under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA).
This was stated by Deputy Solicitor General Suharshi Herath, appearing on behalf of the Attorney General, when a writ petition filed by SDIG Varuna Jayasundara was taken up for consideration on June 12. In his petition, Jayasundara sought an order preventing his arrest without reasonable grounds in connection with the ongoing investigations into the 2019 Easter Sunday terrorist attacks.
The matter was heard before a bench comprising Court of Appeal Judges Shashi Mahendran and Adithya Patabendige. Deputy Solicitor General Herath, appearing for the Attorney General, who has been named as a respondent in the petition, informed the court that investigations are currently being conducted from a new perspective into the Easter Sunday attacks.
She stated that, to date, no evidence adverse to the petitioner has emerged from those investigations. Accordingly, no decision has been made, based on the investigations conducted thus far, to arrest or detain the petitioner under the PTA.
Counsel Suren Gnanaraj, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that a senior official of the Attorney General’s Department had recently made allegations before a Magistrate’s Court that his client had exerted pressure on a witness connected to the Easter Sunday attack investigations.
Justice Patabendige then asked the Deputy Solicitor General whether any evidence had surfaced regarding the incident referred to by the petitioner’s counsel. In response, she stated that no such evidence had emerged so far and that further investigations into the matter were continuing.
Counsel for the petitioner questioned how such allegations could be made without credible evidence. He further informed the court that a request had been made to the Inspector General of Police for the transfer of his client, but no action had yet been taken.
The bench observed that, in view of the ongoing investigations, it would be appropriate to consider a suitable transfer for the petitioner, who serves as a Senior Deputy Inspector General of Police.
Accordingly, the court directed the Deputy Solicitor General to consult the Inspector General of Police and the Attorney General regarding the possibility of transferring the petitioner and to report the outcome to the court on 17 June.
Human institutions remain remarkably committed to generating paperwork at industrial scale, but at least this one ended with a clear court direction rather than another folder gathering dust.
