Mervin Nissanka Anthony vs. The Hon. Attorney General – CA HCC/0232/2016-2022

In the case between Mervin Nissanka Anthony (Accused-Appellant) and the Hon. Attorney General (Complainant-Respondent), the court addressed whether amending the indictment to include an alternative charge of grave sexual abuse under Section 365(b)(2) of the Penal Code, after failure to prove rape under Section 364(1), was proper, and whether such conviction was sustainable on the evidence. It was held that the amendment introducing grave sexual abuse as an alternative, despite the absence of supporting evidence and the distinct elements of the offences, was legally unsound. The principle reaffirmed is that an alternative charge must be legally cognate and properly supported by evidence; failure in this regard undermines a fair trial. The decision drew upon statutory interpretation of the P