Ekanayaka Mudiyanselage Gamini Bandara vs The Hon. Attorney General – CA HCC/100-2020-2023

In the case between the Hon. Attorney General and Ekanayaka Mudiyanselage Gamini Bandara, the court addressed whether the circumstantial evidence, including witness testimonies and forensic findings, sufficiently established the accused’s guilt for a double murder under Section 296 of the Penal Code. The court held that the chain of circumstantial evidence and the conduct of the accused, when analyzed collectively with legal precedents and proper application of evidential statutes, proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The decision reaffirmed the principle that a consistent and complete chain of circumstantial evidence can sustain a conviction in the absence of direct proof, relying on authorities such as Rex v Exall, King v. Abeywickrama, and relevant provisions of the Evidence Ordinance.