U. Sajith Molligodawatte v. Hon. Attorney General – CA HC/104-107/2014-2014

In the case between U. Sajith and others (Accused–Appellants) and the Hon. Attorney General (Respondent), the court addressed the issue of whether convictions for robbery/aggravated robbery under Sections 380 and 383 of the Penal Code were proper in the absence of sufficient identification and evidence of firearm use. It was held that due to evidentiary deficiencies—specifically, the lack of proper identification procedures, the absence of timely identification, and the failure to substantiate alleged firearms as defined under the Firearms Ordinance—the convictions for robbery/aggravated robbery could not be sustained. The principle reaffirmed was that criminal convictions require strict adherence to standards of proof regarding identification and use of weapons. The legal basis relied on