Homagama High Court Judge Navaratna Marasinghe yesterday (23) imposed the death penalty on an individual found guilty of the charge of killing a person by striking him with an iron object, allegedly for stealing two coconuts.

An indictment had been filed under the Penal Code for committing the offense of murder by assaulting and causing the death of a person with an iron tool used for husking coconuts at the Niyadagala paddy field, located within the court’s jurisdiction.

The Judge, after evaluating the testimony given by the witnesses related to the incident, stated that the murder charge filed by the prosecution against the first accused in the case, Ranjith Dharmasena, has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and therefore, he is found guilty of the charge of murder.

Commenting further on the incident, Judge Navaratna Marasinghe stated, “It is clear from the testimony given that the first accused in the incident was clearly identified at the identification parade. It is seen that this testimony was not subjected to any challenge during cross-examination.”

“Therefore, it appears to me that the matters mentioned—specifically, the objections raised during the identification parade held on 2024.01.23 before the preceding judge, claiming that the accused were neighbors of the witnesses conducting the parade and were persons well-known to them—are incorrect.”

“However, while no prejudice can be caused to the 1st accused in this case by the matters so mentioned, and in the context of the relevant identification parade report being submitted as evidence to this court, this court must only consider the objection raised on behalf of the 1st accused at the time the identification parade was conducted.”

“Taken as a whole, no doubt has been raised before this court regarding the testimony given by the two witnesses—the second witness, Uduwanage Amarasena, and the third witness, Wijesundara Mohottalalage Sirisena—that they identified the 1st accused in this case, Kottege Ranjith Dharmasena, at the scene of the crime and [testimony] about him striking the deceased’s head with an iron rod.”

“While this court has no ability to mitigate the sentence as requested in the further written submissions filed on behalf of the defense, I have mentioned earlier in this judgment whether the factual circumstances of this case can be applied according to Section 294, Clause 4 of the Penal Code, as mentioned by the learned defense counsel.”

“Accordingly, I rule that the 1st accused in this case cannot receive relief [under that exception], as the entire evidence presented in this case does not reveal that the 1st accused’s act of injuring the deceased by striking his head with an iron rod was an act committed without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel, as relevant to Section 294 of the Penal Code.”

“When considering all the evidence presented in this case, both collectively and separately, it clearly appears to this court that all the elements required to be proven in the charge filed by the prosecution against all three accused have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt only against the 1st accused. I rule that no acceptable evidence has been presented against the 2nd accused and the 3rd accused, who is now deceased. The 3rd accused passed away during the trial. Accordingly, ruling that the 2nd accused is not guilty of the murder charge filed against him, I acquit and discharge him of that charge.”

“However, I rule that [the charge against] the first accused, Ranjith Dharmasena, has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I find him guilty of the murder charge filed against him. Therefore, I sentence the accused to death,” the judge announced his order.

The Attorney General had filed indictments against the accused in the case related to this incident in the year 2001.