Buddhika Prasanna Liyanage vs Hon. Attorney General – CA HCC 0179/2024-2025

In the matter of the Accused-Appellant and the Prosecution, the court addressed the issue of whether the prosecution proved the chain of custody of seized heroin beyond a reasonable doubt. It was held that the prosecution failed to meet this burden due to a critical unexplained seven-day gap in the chain of custody. This decision reaffirmed the principle that an unbroken chain of custody is crucial in drug-related cases and that the prosecution bears the burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt. This decision relied on precedents such as Woolmington v DPP, Mohamed Nimnaz V. Attorney General, Perera V. Attorney General, and Koushappis v. The State of WA, emphasizing that any significant flaw in the chain of custody can lead to the setting aside of a conviction.

P. Kumararatna