Bomiriyage Lakshman Ranganath Gomez vs. The Attorney General – CA/HCC/0244/16-2024

In the case between the Attorney General’s Department (Plaintiff/Complainant) and Bomiriyage Lakshman Ranganath Gomez (2nd accused-appellant, Defendant/Appellant), the court addressed the issue of whether a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence satisfied the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the evidence presented during the trial was insufficient to sustain the conviction for murder and robbery, finding that the trial judge misdirected himself in failing to properly evaluate the defence and placing undue reliance on the circumstantial nature of the evidence. The decision reaffirmed that the burden of proof in criminal cases must always rest with the prosecution, and convictions must only result from evidence that points incontrovertibly to guilt.