Nandasena v. Attorney-General – sllr 2007 volume 1 page 237

In the case between Nandasena (Plaintiff) and the Attorney-General (Defendant), the court addressed the applicability of the insanity defence under Section 77 of the Penal Code in relation to charges of murder and hurt. It was determined that the onus is on the accused to establish insanity on a balance of probabilities, with the key inquiry focusing on the cognitive ability of the accused to understand the nature and moral wrongfulness of the act, as rooted in the principles from McNaughton’s case. The findings established that the accused failed to meet the evidentiary burden required to prove insanity, as evidence demonstrated awareness of the wrongfulness of the actions. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the convictions and sentences. The decision reaffirmed the legal threshold for t