SOMASIRI
VS.
 ATTORNEY GENERAL

SUPREME COURT
MOHAN PIERIS, PC CJ.
EKANAYAKE, J.
DEP, PCJ.
SC APPEAL 79/2009
SC SPL LA 190/2008
CA CASE NO. 75/2002
HC ANURADHAPURA 31/2000
APRIL 29, 2013

Constitution Article 138 - Penal Code Section 334(1) Section 364(2) (e) - amended by Act 22 of 1995 - Convicted of rape -Dock statement - Procedure in evaluating a dock statement - Failure - Could Court apply Section 334(1) and proviso to article 138 - Miscarriage of justice - Does Section 334 apply only to Jury trials?

The Accused Appellant was indicted for committing rape on one T under Section 364(2) e Penal Code and was convicted - sentenced to term of 10 years rigorous imprisonment. The Court of Appeal accepted the position that the High Court did not adopt the proper approach in evaluating the dock statement, however, acted under Section 334 Criminal Procedure Code and the proviso to Article 138 and held that there is no miscarriage of justice and dismissed the Appeal.

On Appeal to the Supreme Court,

Held:

(1) When a dock statement is made, the jurors must be informed that such statement must be looked upon as evidence, subject however to the infirmity that the accuse