Premadasa v. State – sllr 2000 volume 2 page 385

In Premadasa v. State, the court addressed the legal sufficiency of the conviction for rape in light of discrepancies between the prosecutrix’s account and the Medical Expert’s opinion regarding the timing of the injury. The determination focused on whether the trial judge’s failure to direct the Medical Expert to clarify her findings constituted a grave legal error. It was held that the absence of judicial clarification regarding the critical conflict on the date of the alleged offence amounted to a substantial error of law, necessitating the setting aside of the conviction and ordering acquittal. The judgment reaffirms the principle that a conviction cannot be sustained where crucial evidentiary ambiguities remain unresolved, with reliance placed on procedural fairness and the proper eva