President's Counsel and lawyer summoned over Chandrasena death probe

Fort Magistrate Pasan Amarasekara today (02) issued summons to President’s Counsel Rienzie Arsecularatne and attorney Udara Muhandiram, ordering them to appear in court to provide evidence in the death investigation of former SriLankan Airlines CEO Kapila Chandrasena, who died under mysterious circumstances.

The Magistrate issued the summons while determining whether it was necessary to obtain evidence from the two lawyers, listed as witnesses 19 and 20 in the investigation.

During proceedings, attorney Lakshan Abeywardena appeared on behalf of the Bar Association, while a nine-page court order was read out.

The order stated that under Section 370(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act No. 15 of 1979, evidence from the two lawyers was deemed necessary in relation to Chandrasena’s death.

The ruling also noted that legal confidentiality provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure and Supreme Court Rules generally require lawyers and notaries to protect oral and written communications of their clients.

However, testimony from several witnesses — including Priyangi Anushka, Aravinda de Silva, and witnesses numbered 13, 15, 16 and 17 — indicated that Kapila Chandrasena had visited the President’s Counsel’s office on May 7, 2026, to seek legal advice regarding a court matter.

Another lawyer, Priyantha, testified that on the night of May 7, lawyers numbered 19 and 20 had instructed him to visit Aravinda de Silva’s residence the following morning.

The Magistrate’s order further noted that Aravinda de Silva had acted on instructions allegedly given by attorney Udara Muhandiram regarding the depositing of bail money in a case against Chandrasena at the Colombo Chief Magistrate’s Court, making their testimony relevant to the investigation.

The court held that while lawyers retain the right to preserve client confidentiality under Section 126 of the Evidence Ordinance and Supreme Court Rules, such privilege does not apply if evidence may reveal a crime or fraud, and should not obstruct an investigation.

Accordingly, the court decided to summon witnesses 19 and 20 under Section 370(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code while affirming their right not to disclose confidential legal advice or communications provided by Chandrasena.

The case is scheduled to be taken up again on June 5.