SADATH

Vs.

ATTORNEY GENERAL

SUPREME COURT
ALUWIHARE, J.
MALALGODA, J.
FERNANDO, J.
SC/APPEAL/110/2015
SC/SPL/LA/58/2015
CA/40/2013
HC COLOMBO 61/2003
NOVEMBER 12, 2018, MARCH 11, 2019

Criminal Law-Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance,section 54A-Penal Code, sections 69 and 72-Establishing mens rea when not explicitly stipulated in the offence-Difference between trafficking and possession

The appellant was indicted in the High Court for importing, trafficking in and possessing 1,384 grams of heroin in terms of section 54A of the Poisons, Opium and Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, as amended by Act No. 13 of 1984. The defence taken up by the appellant was that he had no knowledge that he was taking a bag containing heroin. On appeal, the Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.

Held:

1. Unless a statute either clearly or by necessary implication rules out mens rea as a constituent part of a crime, the court should not find a man guilty of a criminal offence unless he has a guilty mind. The prosecution can discharge its burden of establishing the requisite mental element presumptively by adducing circumstance