Iddawala – J

This is an application for bail filed under Section 15B of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act, No. 48 of 1979 (hereinafter PTA), as amended by the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Act, No. 12 of 2022 (hereinafter Amendment Act, No. 12 of 2022) by the petitioner, on behalf of the suspect who is detained at the Remand Prison, Jaffna.

The facts of the case briefly are as follows. The suspect, Buwaneswaran Rajeevan who was an employee of the Sri Lanka Transport Board (SLTB) - Vavuniya was confronted at his residence by a team of Police officers headed by the 1st respondent on 18.10.2020. The 1st respondent proceeded to arrest him on the grounds that he was involved with the terrorist group ‘Saava’ or ‘007’, and functioned as its leader.

The suspect was thereafter produced before the Magistrate’s Court of Chavakachcheri under case No. B/503/2020 on 19.10.2020, and the 3rd respondent reported that the suspect was arrested on information received from the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) that he was the leader of the above-mentioned terrorist group. It was further stated that a sword used by the suspect for the purpose of stabbing a person, and a hand grenade were recovered from the goat-shed located behind the suspect’s house. The suspect was also claimed to have had a photograph of the deceased leader of a proscribed terrorist organization on his mobile phone which he had uploaded on his Facebook profile (vide annexures ‘X’ and ‘P2’).

Thus, upon the 3rd respondent’s request, the suspect was remanded in terms of Section 7(1) of the PTA until further advice is obtained from the Attorney-General. Furthermore, the alleged hand grenade and the mobile phone recovered from the suspect had been forwarded to the Government Analyst’s Department, and their report has been received on 18.03.2021. However, despite nearly two years elapsing since the arrest of the suspect, and more than 18 months having passed since the Government Analyst’s report has been received, no indictment has been filed and no trial has commenced against the suspect. In this connection, a clear Guideline to the investigation officers was set out by the Supreme Court in Sukumar Vs Officer in Charge Joseph Army Camp, Vavuniya (2003) 1 S.L.R. 399, where it opined,

 “…until leave was granted in this application, no steps were taken to have the petitioner brought to trial, nor have steps been taken to ascertain whether the Attorney-General consents to the release of the petitioner from custody in terms of the proviso to section 7(i) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

In court's view, it is a necessary implication of that proviso that the authority responsible for the arrest or detention must inform the Attorney-General as soon as possible of the fact of such arrest and detention in order to enable the Attorney-General to review the matter and to determine whether he should be further detained in custody”.

The petitioner, on behalf of the suspect, states that he denies the said allegations that the suspect was involved in any terrorist group and also denies any weapons being recovered from his house, and further states that no such ‘goat shed’ exists behind his house. He further posits that the suspect was beaten and coerced into admitting this version of events by the respondents. The petitioner states that the suspect has been further aggrieved due to this long incarceration, with his young wife and daughter aged 3 years becoming destitute, and his employer (SLTB) informing him that he is considered to have vacated his post with effect from 19.10.2020. Having thus set out the relevant facts of the case, this Court will now turn to the law. The applicable law is contained in Section 15B of the PTA, as amended by the Amendment Act, No. 12 of 2022. Section 15B stipulates the following:

“Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the provisions of this Act, if the trial against a person remanded or detained under this A