RANJANI PERERA

Vs.

ATTORNEY GENERAL

COURT OF APPEAL
KARUNARATHNA,J.
GURUSINGHE, J.
CA/HCC/121/2017
HC PANADURA 2539/09
OCTOBER 21, 2021

Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, as amended by Act, No. 13 of 1984, section 54A{b) and (c)-Burden of proof and presumption of innocence-Misdirection on burden of proof vitiates the conviction

The appellant was indicted in the High Court under sections 54A(b) and (c) of the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, as amended by Act No. 13 of 1984, for being in possession of and trafficking in 2.4 grams of heroin. After the prosecution closed its case, the appellant gave evidence and denied the incident. The High Court convicted the appellant and passed a sentence of life imprisonment. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Held:

1. In a criminal trial, the burden lies on the prosecution to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. This burden is neither neutralised nor shifted because the accused takes a particular plea in his defence. The prosecution cannot take advantage of the weakness of the defence case. It must stand on its own legs.

2. In a case where any general or special exc