Mohamed Careem vs The Hon. Attorney General – CA-HCC -181/16-2023

In the case between Mohamed Careem (Accused-Appellant) and The Hon. Attorney General (Respondent), the court addressed the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence for establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt in a murder prosecution under Section 296 of the Penal Code. It was held that conviction is warranted only if proved circumstantial facts are so conclusive as to exclude any reasonable hypothesis except guilt, reaffirming the principle that evidence must form a complete and unbroken chain leading solely to the accused. Reliance was placed on established precedents and statutory interpretation of circumstantial evidence requirements, underscoring that any reasonable doubt as to the accused’s involvement must lead to acquittal.

B. Sasi Mahendran J. — Detailed evaluation of the evidenc