Abeywickramasinghe Gunawardena Sumith Chandana alias Susith Chandana vs Attorney General – CA 227-229/16 -2023

In the case between the Accused Appellants (three individuals) and the Attorney General (State), the court addressed whether the trial judge’s summing up to the jury was legally adequate, particularly in the context of circumstantial evidence and the procedural rights of the accused. It was held that the summing up was insufficient and procedurally flawed, with serious omissions regarding the proper presentation and assessment of circumstantial evidence, the handling of recoveries under section 27(1), and the accused’s right to fairly present their defense. Reference was made to established case law highlighting the necessity of clear judicial directions on circumstantial evidence. The verdicts and sentences were set aside, reaffirming the principle that jury instructions must be fair, imp