Nandasena v. The Republic of Sri Lanka – sllr 1994 volume 3 page 172

In the case between Nandasena (Plaintiff) and The Republic of Sri Lanka (Defendant), the court addressed the adequacy of the trial judge’s instructions to the jury on the treatment of circumstantial evidence in a murder trial. It was held that the trial judge’s directions were sufficiently clear and appropriate, ensuring that the jury based its conviction solely on facts that excluded any reasonable hypothesis other than the accused’s guilt. The principle reaffirmed is that in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, judicial directions must make clear that a conviction can only be entered when the evidence is inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence. This decision relied on established precedents including Wimalasena v. The Queen and McGreevy v. D. P. P., emphasizing the court’s com