Attorney General v. Priyantha – sllr 2001 volume 2 page 096

In The Attorney General v. Priyantha, the Court of Appeal considered whether the evidence, particularly the medical testimony, substantiated the criminal charge of rape under S. 364(2)(e) of the Penal Code (as amended by Act 22 of 1995) against the respondent. The case scrutinized the credibility and consistency of the prosecutrix’s testimony in view of adverse medical evidence and evaluated the propriety of revising the High Court’s acquittal. It was held that material inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence and the absence of corroborative medical findings precluded a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. The principle was reaffirmed that proof beyond reasonable doubt is required for a criminal conviction. The court’s decision centered on the lack of adequate prosecutorial evidence,