News
Faulty breathalyzers, hyperglycemia could give inaccurate results on blood alcohol: Medical officials
View(s):By Ishu Bandara
Consequently, a false positive on a breathalyzer can lead to arrests, fines, or license suspension, even though the individual was not under the influence of alcohol.
This can have significant personal and professional consequences for the diabetic patient, as being wrongfully accused of driving under the influence can lead to emotional distress and impact a person’s reputation.
(Top and right) Two types of breathalyzers
Dr Samantha Jayasinghe, a medical official, explained to the Sunday Times, “Breathalyzers are designed to detect alcohol, but in cases of severe diabetes, a condition called diabetic ketoacidosis can lead to complications. In this condition, the body is unable to use sugar for energy and instead breaks down fat, producing ketone bodies as a by-product. These ketones can be present in the urine or blood for up to 30 days and have a smell similar to alcohol, known as acetone. When speaking to someone with this condition, the smell of ketones can be mistaken for alcohol.”
He further explained, “If such a person uses a breathalyzer, it may result in a false positive. I recommend conducting a blood test to confirm intoxication, as breathalyzers can be unreliable in these cases. Police should take individuals with such health conditions to the nearest government hospital for an alcohol test to avoid wrongful accusations.”
However, Police typically rely on visible signs of intoxication to make such determinations and don’t use blood tests in every suspected case. Additionally, even using mouthwash, which contains certain types of alcohol, can trigger a false positive on a breathalyzer,” Dr Jayasinghe added. 
A recent incident involving Chula Bandara Banneheka, a media consultant in Sri Lanka, has sparked controversy. Despite not consuming alcohol for days, he was found intoxicated by the Kirindiwela Police following a breathalyzer test on January 2.
Banneheka recounted to the Sunday Times: “Around 3.30 pm my wife and I went to Kirindiwela town for household items. While she was in a pharmacy buying medicine, I waited in the car, eating peanuts. Two policemen approached, asked if I was drunk, and dismissed my denial. They insisted on taking me to the station for a breathalyzer test, with one officer driving my vehicle.”
Mr Banneheka explained that the breathalyzer test returned a positive result. Despite assuring the Police that he hadn’t consumed alcohol for a long time, he repeatedly requested a medical examination and asked to be referred to the Judicial Medical Officer (JMO).
Trusting the Police’s assurance that he would be referred to the JMO, he signed the breathalyzer test report. However, in the end, the Police refused to facilitate the referral.
When the Sunday Times inquired about the incident, Officer on Charge (OIC) of Kirindiwela Police Sanath Nandalal responded, “Yes, there was an incident, and the individual was arrested for drunken driving after a positive breathalyzer test. He was forwarded to court on January 7, 2025, where he pleaded guilty. The court fined him 25,000 rupees and suspended his license for three months.”
He clarified, “After the breathalyzer test, the Police considered it unnecessary to refer him to the JMO, as it is not the Police’s duty. The breathalyzer test alone is sufficient to proceed with the case in court.”
Ajith Pathirana
Police Spokesman SSP K B Manathunga told the Sunday Times that questioning the Police after the defendant pleaded guilty and paid the fine was unreasonable, as all procedures had been followed. He emphasised that the breathalyzer test is legally accepted, and under Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), the case could be forwarded to court without requiring a JMO report.
He also explained that if an officer had seen the suspect driving before stopping him, the arrest was lawful.
SSP Manathunga revealed that the breathalyzers imported in 2022 were found to have quality issues, and as a result, they were rejected based on a report from the Government Analyst.
Senior Lawyer Ajith Pathirana, who represented Mr Banneheka, told the Sunday Times, “My client clearly requested a JMO report from the Police on the day of his arrest, but the Police refused. Since we didn’t have the necessary evidence to present in court to prove that my client wasn’t under the influence of alcohol at the time, and given his health issues, including being a heart patient, he became exhausted by the lengthy process and decided to plead guilty and pay the fine.”
He added, “We have no objection to the court’s decision, as the magistrate must base the ruling on the available evidence, which we were unable to provide at that time. Had the JMO report been available, we would have been able to forward it to the court.”
According to legal sources, obtaining the JMO report is crucial for a victim in such a rare health situation to prove their innocence.
Chula Bandara Bannehaka
Mr Banneheka, after leaving the Police, had visited the Gampaha General Hospital’s Progressive Care Unit (PCU) a few hours later. He was referred to the JMO from the hospital.
When contacted by the Sunday Times, Gampaha General Hospital Director Dr B D A T Wanigarathne provided details about the incident:
“Mr Banneheka arrived at the hospital reporting symptoms of unwellness and explained his encounter with the Police to the medical officer at the admission unit. The medical officer documented the Police’s suspicion of alcohol consumption in the Diagnosis Ticket and conducted blood tests based on the symptoms presented.”
Dr Wanigarathne continued: “If the Diagnosis Ticket indicates a Police case, the hospital board refers the patient to the Judicial Medical Officer (JMO). In this case, JMO Dr Ruhul Huq conducted the necessary examinations and completed the Medico-Legal Examination Form (MLEF).”
He clarified that the MLEF is a legal document sent exclusively to the Police. JMO Dr Ruhul Huq confirmed that Mr Banneheka’s MLEF had already been forwarded to the relevant Police station.
Dr Wanigarathne added: “The JMO only forwards the MLEF to the courts if specifically requested by the court.”
According to SSP Manathunga, some breathalyzer devices were found to have quality issues.
When asked about this by the Sunday Times, Government Analyst Sandya Kumudini Rajapakse confirmed that her department had recently tested two batches of breathalyzers this year, both of which failed quality assessments. “One batch was received on August 22, 2024, and we issued a failed report on August 28. The second batch arrived on September 18, 2024, and similarly, we forwarded a failed report on September 30, 2024,” she stated.
The best way to say that you found the home of your dreams is by finding it on Hitad.lk. We have listings for apartments for sale or rent in Sri Lanka, no matter what locale you're looking for! Whether you live in Colombo, Galle, Kandy, Matara, Jaffna and more - we've got them all!