Ekanayaka Mudiyanselage Gamini Bandara vs The Hon. Attorney General – CA HCC/0100/2020-2024

In the case between Ekanayaka Mudiyanselage Gamini Bandara (Accused-Appellant) and The Hon. Attorney General (Complainant-Respondent), the court addressed the issue of whether the circumstantial evidence presented was sufficient to uphold the conviction for double murder under Section 296 of the Penal Code. It was held that the cumulative circumstantial evidence, including conduct, physical evidence, and statements attributed to the accused, established a nexus consistent solely with guilt. The principle reaffirmed was that circumstantial evidence, when cumulatively sufficient and excluding any reasonable hypothesis of innocence, can form the basis for conviction. Reliance was placed on established case law and the proper application of Section 27(1) of the Evidence Ordinance, emphasizing