The State vs. Nallathamby Kandasamy and Vinayagamoorthy Maohan – CA/HCC/0081/12-2022

In the case between the Attorney General (Complainant-Respondent) and Nallathamby Kandasamy and Vinayagamoorthy Maohan (Accused-Appellants), the court considered the legality of the trial process, the admissibility of hearsay evidence, and the adequacy of the evaluation of evidence regarding a charge of murder. It was held that significant procedural errors, particularly the improper acceptance of the deposition of PW 3 and inadequate compartmentalization of evidence related to each accused, rendered the conviction unsafe. The reasoning reaffirmed the principle that criminal convictions must be based on evidence established beyond reasonable doubt and in compliance with statutory procedures. Reliance was placed on the Judicature Act (section 48) and established evidentiary norms, with the