The Hon. Attorney General vs Gajanange Dayawansha – CA HCC 275/19-2021

In the case between the Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12 (Complainant-Respondent) and Gajanange Dayawansha (Accused-Appellant), the central issue addressed was whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to uphold a conviction for murder under Section 296 of the Penal Code, in the absence of direct witnesses. It was held that the conviction was justified, as the proved circumstances were consistent with the guilt of the appellant and excluded any other reasonable inference. The principle reaffirmed was that circumstantial evidence must be such as to point only to the guilt of the accused, relying on precedents including Shankarlal Gyarasilal Dixit v. State of Maharashtra and Junaiden Mohmed Haaris v. Hon. Attorney General. This decision reinforces the sta