Seetha Mary & other vs The Hon. Attorney General – CA/HCC/190-191/17-2024

In the case between the Hon. Attorney General (Complainant-Respondent) and Seetha Mary and Kapracharilage Upun Ranjith Kumara (alias Niroshan) (Accused-Appellants), the court addressed the issue of whether the circumstantial evidence presented sufficiently established the murder of a female child under Section 296 of the Penal Code. The court held that the evidence was conclusive, the trial was properly conducted despite a guilty plea, and upheld both the conviction and death sentence. This decision reaffirmed the principle that, in cases reliant on circumstantial evidence, the totality of evidence must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court relied on relevant statutory provisions such as Section 296 of the Penal Code, Section 120(2) of the Evidence Ordinance, and Section 81 of