Heenage Gunathilake Vs Hon. Attorney General – HCC/73/2019-2023

In the case between the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (Complainant/Respondent) and Heenage Gunathilake (Accused/Appellant), the court addressed the sufficiency and reliability of circumstantial evidence in a murder conviction. It was held that the prosecution’s evidence, primarily based on the testimony of PW1 and related witness statements, failed to prove the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies and inadequacies in the chain of evidence. The legal principle reaffirmed is that conviction must rest on evidence which excludes a reasonable hypothesis of innocence, referencing cases such as King v. Abeywickrema and B.R.R.A. Jagath Pramawansha v. The Attorney General. The judgment underscores the necessity for cogent and consistent evidence in criminal