Mahathun and Others vs. Attorney General – sllr 2015 volume 1 page 074

In the case between Mahathun and Others (Plaintiffs) and the Attorney General (Defendant), the court addressed the issue of whether the trial court’s reliance on the key eyewitness testimony of Kanthi—despite minor discrepancies—was sufficient to uphold a murder conviction under Penal Code Sections 296 and 32. It was held that minor inconsistencies in witness testimony, when not central to the main issue and when corroborated by other evidence, do not undermine the reliability of the conviction. The principle reaffirmed is that appellate courts should not disturb findings of credibility by the trial judge unless such findings are shown to be manifestly wrong. This approach is grounded in established jurisprudence on the appreciation of evidence and the role of the trial court in assessing