Dassanayake vs. The Hon. Attorney General – CA HCC/0238/2017-2023

In the case between the Attorney General’s Department (Complainant-Respondent) and Dahanaka Ralalage Nimal Dassanayake (Accused-Appellant), the court addressed the sufficiency and reliability of circumstantial evidence in a murder conviction. It was held that the circumstantial evidence, when considered as a whole, pointed conclusively to the appellant’s guilt and that the legal standards for convicting on such evidence were satisfied. The principle reaffirmed is that circumstantial evidence must not only be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt but also be inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. The decision relied on judicial precedents concerning circumstantial evidence and the admissibility of recovered evidence under Section 27(1) of the Evidence Ordinance, underli