Ranasinghe Aarachchige Dushan Suranga vs. Hon. Attorney General – CA HCC/135/2022-2024

In the case between Hon. Attorney General and Ranasinghe Aarachchige Dushan Suranga, the court addressed the issue of whether the prosecution’s eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence were credible and sufficient to uphold a conviction for murder. The court held that the prosecution’s evidence, comprising both forensic findings and eyewitness observations, was reliable despite arguments concerning witness inconsistencies and trauma-induced misperception. The principle reaffirmed was that deference should be given to a trial judge’s appraisal of witness credibility and overall management of evidence. Reliance was placed on precedents upholding the sufficiency of evidence as reviewed at trial, emphasizing that minor inconsistencies do not displace well-founded trial judge findings.