IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE DEMOCRETIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Appeal in terms of section 331 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act No- 15 of 1979, read with Article 138 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

Court of Appeal No: Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka CA/HCC/0376/2017 COMPLAINANT Vs.

High Court of Kegalle K. K. Dinesh Thilina Dhanushka Case No: HC/1941/2003 Ariyarathne alias Senavi ACCUSED AND NOW BETWEEN K. K. Dinesh Thilina Dhanushka Ariyarathne alias Senavi ACCUSED-APPELLANT Vs.

The Attorney General Attorney General’s Department Colombo 12 RESPONDENT Before : Sampath B Abayakoon, J.

: P. Kumararatnam, J.

Counsel : Sahan Kulathunga for Accused Appellant : Janaka Bandara, S.S.C. for the Respondent Argued on : 22-02-022 Written Submissions : 05-09-2018 (By the Accused-Appellant)

: 15-02-2019 (By the Respondent)

Decided on : 31-03-2022 Sampath B Abayakoon, J.

This is an appeal by the accused appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) on being aggrieved by the conviction and the sentence imposed on him by the learned High Court Judge of Kegalle.

The appellant was indicted before the High Court of Kegalle for causing the death of Kiriammalakanda Lekamlage Disna Priyangika Senaviratne between 22^nd April 1992 and 27^th April 1992, and thereby committing the offence of murder, an offence punishable in terms of section 296 of the Penal Code.

The retrial held against the appellant was before a jury. After the conclusion of the trial, the jury entered a unanimous verdict of guilty against the appellant, and accordingly, he was sentenced to death by the learned High Court Judge of Kegalle by his sentence dated 11-12-2017.

It needs to be noted that the appellant has given his written consent for his Counsel to argue this appeal in the absence of his personal presence in the Court due to the prevailing COVID pandemic situation. However, he was allowed to observe proceedings before the Court via Zoom platform from the prison.

At the hearing of this appeal the learned Counsel for the appellant formulated the following grounds of appeal for the consideration of the Court.

Grounds of appeal: -

(1) On the material placed before the Court the jury could not have reached a verdict of guilt.

(2) The learned trial judge failed to place material evidence before the jury which amounts to a misdirection.

(3) The learned trial judge misdirected himself as to the evidence led in his summing up.

The facts relating to the incident, briefly, are as follows;

The appellant who was a police officer, developed a love affair with the deceased after visiting their house as a friend of her brother (PW-01). According to the evidence of the brother, his sister left for employment in Abu Dhabi in order to save enough money for her and the appellant to live as they intended to get married. She has sent all the money she saved to the appellant expecting him to build a house in Kurunegala. After she returned from overseas, she was keen to get married to the appellant in order commence a life together. At the instigation of the appellant PW-01 and his sister has gone to Kurunegala and has contracted a marriage between the deceased and the appellant. About fifteen days after the marriage the deceased went overseas again to earn money to build the house the appellant has said that he was building, and has sent her earnings to the appellant for that purpose. However, while overseas, she has come to know through the sister of the appellant that he is already a married man. This has prompted her to return to Sri Lanka and confront the appellant. The marriage between the deceased and the appellant was later found to be a bogus marriage. This has resulted in her making a complaint to the higher police authorities against the appellant. During the period, the deceased had also suffered a miscarriage.

According to the evidence of the PW-01, despite all the problems faced by the deceased and against the