Officer‑ in ‑Charge, Kandy Police v. Selladurai – 1978_79 volume 2 page 086

In Officer-in-Charge, Kandy Police v. Selladurai, the court addressed the issue of whether an accused, charged under section 394 of the Penal Code for dishonestly retaining stolen property, provided a reasonable explanation for possession that shifted the onus to the prosecution to establish falsity beyond reasonable doubt. The findings established that the accused’s account of purchase from a named individual (Selliah), supported by testimony, constituted a reasonable explanation. Relying on the precedent set in Kandiah v. Podisingho, the court held that the prosecution had failed to discharge its burden of proving the explanation false, resulting in the acquittal of the accused. This decision underscores the principle that when an accused offers a plausible and supported account for poss