Jeganathan, G. v. Attorney General and Others – sllr 1982 volume 1 page 294

The case between G. Jeganathan (petitioner) and the Attorney-General with other respondents, addressed the issue of whether the petitioner’s application under Article 126, alleging torture and seeking to introduce oral evidence, satisfied the required procedural standards, particularly under Rule 65 regarding the sufficiency of affidavits. The court held that the petitioner had not established adequate grounds for the admissibility of oral evidence due to deficiencies in affidavit evidence and procedural non-compliance. This decision reaffirmed the principle that oral evidence will only be admitted in exceptional circumstances where affidavit evidence is unattainable. Reliance was placed on the Rules of the Supreme Court, emphasizing strict procedural compliance in applications under Artic