JUDGEMENT

1. The accused–appellant was indicted before the High Court of Gampaha for allegedly committing the murder of Ajith Priyankara, an offence punishable under Section 296 of the Penal Code. The trial was conducted before the learned High Court Judge of Gampaha without a jury. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned Judge found the accused–appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) guilty of the charge of murder, and accordingly convicted him and sentenced him to death.

2. Being aggrieved by the said Conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred the present appeal. The grounds of appeal advanced by the Appellant are as follows:

1. The learned trial Judge has failed to appreciate the salient aspects of a case based on circumstantial evidence.

2. The evidence available is not sufficient and does not give rise to the irrepressible inference that the accused committed the offence’

3. The learned trial Judge has misinterpreted the evidence of the ballistic expert and used such evidence against the accused;

4. The learned trial Judge has failed to appreciate the medical evidence with regard to the distance of shooting

5. The learned trial Judge has failed to understan