Ajith vs. Attorney General (Mathugama Triple Murder Case) – sllr 2014 volume 1 page 408

In the case between Ajith (Plaintiff) and the Attorney General (Defendant), arising from the Mathugama Triple Murder Case, the court considered the admissibility of deposition evidence under Section 33 of the Evidence Ordinance as an exception to the hearsay rule. The primary legal issues addressed were the justification and legal significance of a 2½ year delay in recording the testimony of a minor witness, the satisfaction of the requirements for contemporaneity, spontaneity, and prompt opportunity for cross-examination, as well as the accused’s right to counsel at a non-summary inquiry. It was held that the child’s statement was admissible, the delay was warranted by the witness’s age and trauma, and the necessary legal standards under Section 33 were met. The appellate court ruled that