Colombo, 31 August 2026 – The Sri Lankan Court of Appeal has decisively dismissed a bail application filed on behalf of Jayasekera Withanage Ruwan Chamara, also known as Midigama Ruwan, a key suspect linked to the notorious underworld figure Nadun Chinthaka Wickremarathne alias ‘Harak Kata’. The application, CA/BAL/448/2025, was filed by Ruwan Chamara’s mother, Jayasinghe Arachchige Asilin, under Section 15B of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment) Act No. 12 of 2022 (PTA).
Background of the Arrest and Charges
Midigama Ruwan was apprehended on 31 May 2024 at the Katunayake International Airport, having been extradited from Dubai following an international red notice and warrant. He faces serious charges under Sections 3(a), (b) and 5(a), (b) read with Section 2(1)(a), (c) and (e) of the PTA. The arrest is in connection with the attempted escape of the 1st Accused, ‘Harak Kata’, from the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) on 10 September 2023, an incident that raised significant security concerns.
Following his extradition, Ruwan Chamara was initially held under a Detention Order. However, with no direct terrorist acts revealed against him, he was subsequently remanded. An indictment dated 02 July 2025 was filed, and the case is now being heard in the Colombo High Court under case no. HC/5447/25.
Petitioner’s Grounds for Bail
Jayasinghe Arachchige Asilin, the petitioner, presented several grounds to the Court of Appeal for granting bail to her son. Key arguments included:
- A lack of direct evidence against the 4th Accused.
- That Ruwan Chamara had been in remand for one year and three months since his arrest, exceeding the 12-month maximum detention period specified under Section 15B(1) of the PTA.
- The assertion that the gravity of the alleged offence should not be an automatic reason for denying bail.
- Claims that his arrest and investigation under the PTA provisions were illegal, given that he had not committed any offences punishable under the Act.
Court’s Analysis and Discretionary Powers
The bail application was heard before Justices P. Kumararatnam and Pradeep Hettiarachchi. The Court meticulously examined Section 15B of the PTA, clarifying that while it permits the Court of Appeal to grant bail if a trial has not commenced after 12 months from the date of arrest, the use of the word “may” indicates a discretionary power, not a mandatory obligation. The bench emphasized that judicial discretion must be exercised, taking into account all relevant surrounding circumstances.
Referencing a prior Court of Appeal decision (CA/BAL/81/2022), the Justices reiterated that considerations for granting bail include the gravity and severity of the offence, likelihood of absconding, possibility of tampering with evidence or witnesses, potential for re-offending, and the overall progress of investigations.
Reasons for Dismissal
After a thorough review of the facts and submissions, the Court of Appeal identified several compelling reasons to dismiss the bail application:
- Propensity for Criminal Activities: Midigama Ruwan has a history of criminal convictions, including four instances between 2019 and 2020 for possession of Cannabis and Heroin, indicating a tendency to re-engage in illegal activities.
- Pending Serious Cases: He is currently facing nearly five other pending cases for grave offences such as murder and causing mischief, along with a case for using a forged identity card for money laundering.
- Flight Risk: A critical factor was his previous act of absconding. Ruwan Chamara had fled the country to Dubai while on bail for other offences, necessitating an international red notice for his apprehension. The Court viewed this as strong evidence of his propensity to evade the judicial process, posing a substantial risk of absconding if granted bail again.
- Risk of Interference: Given his alleged links to the underworld and involvement in the attempt to aid ‘Harak Kata’s’ escape, the Court could not rule out the possibility of him interfering with witnesses or obstructing justice if released.
The Court concluded that the specific circumstances of the case did not warrant the exercise of its discretionary powers under Section 15B of the Prevention of Terrorism Act in favour of Midigama Ruwan.
Consequently, the bail application filed by Jayasinghe Arachchige Asilin was dismissed. The Registrar of the Court of Appeal has been directed to transmit copies of the order to the Registrar of the High Court of Colombo and the Officer-in-Charge of the Terrorist Investigation Division of Colombo 01 without delay.
Source: Read original document