Abeysekera v. Attorney General – sllr 1981 volume 1 page 376

In Abeysekera vs. Attorney-General, the court addressed the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence supporting convictions for unlawful assembly, robbery, and murder. It was determined that the identification parade procedures, the connection between the accused and the stolen property, and the inferences to be drawn from recent possession raised issues regarding the reliability and conclusiveness of the prosecution’s case, particularly the presumption tying possession of stolen property directly to involvement in murder. The appellate judgment, guided by principles from common law authorities and precedent, clarified that possession of stolen articles alone does not justify a presumption of participation in murder without further supporting evidence. The conviction and sentence of the 2nd