Baddewithana v. The Attorney General – sllr 1990 volume 1 page 275

In Baddewithana v. The Attorney-General, the court addressed the issue of whether an adverse inference could be drawn under section 114(f) of the Evidence Ordinance against an accused public health inspector for failing to call available witnesses in a bribery prosecution, and whether conviction could be sustained in the absence of corroborative, independent evidence proving the money received was a bribe rather than rent. It was determined that it is inappropriate to draw an adverse inference solely from the accused’s omission to summon such witnesses unless prosecution evidence is sufficiently corroborated. The conviction was deemed unsafe, reaffirming that no adverse presumption arises without primary proof of guilt and emphasizing the necessity of corroborative evidence in bribery pros