Thiramanna Gedera Maheepala Vs. Hon. Attorney General – CA 13/2011-2014

In the case between Thiramanna Gedera Maheepala (Accused-Appellant) and the Hon. Attorney General (Respondent), the court addressed whether the defence of insanity under Section 77 of the Penal Code was applicable to the Accused-Appellant, specifically considering the implications of a psychiatric report that had been filed but not produced in evidence at trial. It was held that the defence of insanity could not be sustained since it was not pleaded at trial and the psychiatric report was not formally admitted as evidence. The principle reaffirmed that the burden for an insanity defence rests on the balance of probabilities, as established in Barnes Nimalaratne v. The Republic of Sri Lanka, and mere doubt or references to unproduced documents cannot support such a plea. The findings establ