S.B.M.S.B. Sallay, wife of retired Major General Suresh Sallay, has raised serious concerns over the circumstances surrounding her husband’s detention by the Criminal Investigation Department under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

In a letter addressed to the CID Director, she said restrictions had been imposed on family visits and consultations with lawyers, while requests to provide food from home had also been refused. She said that despite applying for a Police Clearance Certificate to enable their son to visit his father, the document had not yet been issued, preventing him from meeting the detainee.

Sallay’s legal team—President’s Counsel Anujaya Premarathne and Attorneys-at-Law Rasika Balasuriya, Asith Siriwardena and Bhanuka R. Malaviarachchi—have filed a motion before the Fort Magistrate’s Court seeking relief, including access to the full case record, expanded family visitation, permission to provide food, and safeguards for Sallay’s well-being.

During the proceedings, the Magistrate reportedly observed that the court had not been officially informed of Sallay’s detention. A CID officer told court that Sallay had not yet been named as a suspect in any case, though authorities were considering under which case he might be listed.

Mrs. Sallay said the situation raised procedural concerns, noting that the Prevention of Terrorism Act requires a certified copy of any Detention Order to be submitted to court within 48 hours.

She also expressed alarm over a lawyer consultation on 04 March which, she said, was conducted in the presence of CID officers who observed and took notes. According to her, one officer placed a mobile phone on the table in a manner suggesting the conversation was being recorded.

The lawyers objected, citing a breach of attorney–client confidentiality, after which the device was removed. Mrs. Sallay further pointed to conflicting information regarding the case under which her husband was being held.

While CID officers reportedly referred to Case No. 35882/24 at the Fort Magistrate’s Court, earlier statements had indicated that he had not yet been named as a suspect. She has requested written clarification from the CID regarding the specific case, advance notice of court production dates, and assurances concerning her husband’s legal rights and well-being.