Munusaami David vs Hon. Attorney General – CA HCC 156/2023-2025

In the case between Munusaami David (Accused-Appellant) and the Hon. Attorney General and the Attorney General’s Department, the court addressed the sufficiency of eyewitness testimony, especially that of PW1, in sustaining a murder conviction, and considered the merits of intoxication as a legal defence. It was held that the conviction for murder was supported by credible eyewitness evidence and corroborative forensic findings, notwithstanding the defence’s arguments regarding intoxication and denial of involvement. The decision reaffirmed the principle that reliable eye-witness testimony, supported by medical and forensic evidence, can outweigh unsubstantiated defences such as intoxication. The judgment was underpinned by relevant sections of the Evidence Ordinance and established legal