Jayagoda And Another v. Attorney General – sllr 2006 volume 2 page 387

In the case between Jayagoda and Another (petitioners) and the Attorney General (respondent), the court addressed whether property taken during a claim inquiry should automatically be returned to the petitioners following acquittal or when the offence is unproven. It was held that there is no automatic entitlement to the return of seized property merely due to acquittal or insufficient evidence; instead, the court retains discretion to make appropriate disposal orders. The decision relied on statutory interpretation of Sections 425, 110(3), and 110(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and related authorities. The findings established that although the inquiry was held under an incorrect section, no party was prejudiced, and, consequently, the application for revision was refused, underscor