JUDGMENT

P. Kumararatnam, J.

The above-named Accused-Appellant (hereinafter referred to as the Appellant) was indicted by the Attorney General for committing the offence as mentioned below.

On or about the 15^th January 2005 in Maithreegama the accused-Appellant committed the murder of Dingiri Bandage Kusumawathie which is an offence punishable under Section 296 of Penal Code.

As the Appellant opted for a jury trial, the trial commenced before a jury. The prosecution had led thirteen witnesses and marked production P1-8 and closed the case. The Learned High Court Judge having satisfied that evidence presented by the prosecution warrant a case to answer, called for the defence and explained the rights of the accused. Having selected the right to make a statement from the dock, the Appellant had proceeded to deny the charge by way of his dock statement.

After the summing up, the jury retired for deliberation and returned the verdict of guilty to the charge of murder with a 6:1 majority decision. The Learned High Court Judge had convicted the Appellant as charged and sentenced him to death on 05/12/2016.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence the Appellant preferred this appeal to this court.

The Learned Counsel for the Appellant informed this court that the Appellant has given consent to argue this matter in his absence due to the Covid 19 pandemic. At the hearing the Appellant was connected via Zoom platform from prison.

In his solitary ground of appeal, the Appellant contends whether the DNA evidence was sufficient to convict the Appellant for the charge of murder.

The background of the case albeit briefly is as follows:

In this case no direct evidence is available but the case rests on circumstantial evidence, especially on the DNA evidence.

PW4 Soma Ranatunga was a neighbour of the deceased at the time of the incident. On the day of the incident, the Appellant also was also a neighbour of the deceased, had come to her house as usual and left in about ten minutes time. After his departure, at about 7.00 p.m. the deceased had come to PW4’s house to give some fish curry which she had cooked. After some time, she went back home. At about 10.00 p.m. she had heard cries similar to a child from the direction of the deceased’s house. The witness, her husband and her son came out to check who was crying. This witness’s husband had called the Appellant’s father also to the scene. As the shouting ceased, the Appellant’s parents had gone to inform this unusual happening to the deceased’s daughter as she was living alone in her house. According to her evidence the Appellant was not present at the scene at that time.

According to PW6 Wagirasena, one of the daughters of the deceased, when she was at home on the date of the incident, at about 9.30 p.m. the Appellant’s father had come and informed about the cries heard from the deceased’s house. Immediately she had gone with the Appellant’s father to check with her mother. When she went to her mother’s house, she had seen her deceased mother was lying on the bed. When she called her mother and touched her body, she had realized that her mother had passed away already. Other witnesses and village people also arrived there and the message was sent to the police.

According to PW6, the Appellant was not in good terms with the deceased as the deceased had told this witness that the Appellant had resisted her decision to clean the rear side of the land.

Police officers from Galenbindunuwewa Police Station had arrived at the scene of crime at about 3.00 a.m. and conducted the inquiry.

PW14 Damitha Perera was the Officer-in-Charge of Galenbindunuwewa Police Station. He too arrived the scene and conducted investigation. A small knife was recovered under the body of the deceased. As per the information received, he arrested the Appellant at his resident at about 5.30 a.m. At the time of the arrest, the Appellant was wearing a white coloured short sleeve shirt and a pair of shorts. A blood like stain