SAIBU
vs.
ATTORNEY GENERAL

COURT OF APPEAL
H.N.J. PERERA J.
JAYATILEKE J.
CA 2568/2008
CA 106/2012
OCTOBER 28, 2014

Penal Code - Section 265 B[2] amended by Act 22 of 1995- 29 of 1998- Offence of child abuse -Failure of trial judge to analyze the evidence- fatal? Mens Rea- Actus Reus- Sexual molestation - abuse - No reason for excuse once the physical act has taken place ?

The accused-appellant was convicted and sentenced for committing the offence of child abuse. The accused appellant contended that the evidence of the victim does not support the charge leveled against the accused - appellant. It was contended that, what is mentioned in the charge is that by using accused appellant's organ on the victim's thigh area - but according to his evidence, the accused-appellant had placed his organ on the back of the victim- implying that the accused-appellant had used the rectum of the victim.

Held:

(1) It is a subtle point whether it is the intention or the desire that charges a man to commit a sexual offence. Unlike in criminal offences, the sexual act that is 'Actus Reus' itself speaks about the 'Mens Rea' of the crime unless an offender has any other