Police push for restraining order against Sri Lankan cricketer found not guilty of sexually assaulting his Tinder date

Police are pushing for a violence order to be issued against a Sri Lankan cricket star despite him being cleared of sexually assaulting a woman in her Sydney home.

Danushka Gunathilaka, 32, was finally allowed to leave Australia in October after about 10 months on bail after being acquitted following a court trial in September.

Police alleged that Gunathilaka removed a condom without consent, known as ‘stealthing’, during a sexual encounter with a woman he met on Tinder.

On Wednesday, the case returned to the local court, where it was revealed that police were still pushing for an AVO to be taken out on behalf of the woman against the cricketer.

A prosecutor told the court on Wednesday that the AVO was put under pressure by the officer responsible.

But Mr Gunathilaka’s lawyer Alen Sahinovic told the court his client was living at home in Sri Lanka and would need time to receive instructions. The case will return to court in December.

The decision comes despite Judge Sarah Huggett, who presided over the trial, finding that the police who attempted to prosecute Mr Gunathilaka acted ‘unreasonably’.

At a costs hearing last week, Judge Huggett told the court she had “significant concerns” about the prosecution’s case.

“I firmly believe that if the prosecutor had been in possession of evidence and all the relevant facts – before the initiation of proceedings – it would not have been reasonable to initiate proceedings,” she said.

The top-order T20 batsman was arrested in November 2022 and charged with four counts of sexual assault after the woman reported the matter to Bondi police.

The court was told the woman told Gunathilaka she would only agree to sex if he wore a condom, which he “grumbled” about but eventually agreed to.

Notes from the woman’s first police interview show that she told officers the condom had been removed “against her will”, which Mr Gunathilaka denied.

During that interview, Judge Huggett said the woman had failed to record ‘critical’ evidence which she later provided to police in a statement about six months later.

In the end, the police only proceeded with a single charge, that of stealth, with the charges relating to the alleged roughness of the sex being dropped.

“The deficiencies in the prosecution’s case on stealth, bearing in mind that the case did not involve rough or aggressive sexual intercourse, were clear,” Judge Huggett said.

“They were not a result of the factual findings made at trial… Nor were the deficiencies simply a matter of the complainant’s credibility.

“There were so many inherent problems and difficulties with the prosecution case that should have been apparent to the prosecutor from the outset.”

Judge Huggett ordered that a certificate be issued to Mr Gunathilaka so that he can be ordered to pay costs.

The police argued that in deciding to prosecute Mr Gunathilaka they could not have predicted what ‘factual findings would be made at trial’.

Following the acquittal, Mr Gunathilaka told the media that he was looking forward to resuming his playing career.

“I think the judge’s ruling says it all,” he said outside the courtroom, thanking his family, lawyers, manager and supporters.

He added: ‘The last eleven months have been very difficult for me… I’m happy that my life is back to normal so I can’t wait to get back and play cricket.’

After hearing four days of evidence, Judge Huggett ruled there was ‘no option’ to remove the condom because the intercourse was ‘continuous’.