Ranasinghe & Others vs The Attorney General – CA 186-187/2007-2013

In the case between Somi Ranasinghe, Karunasiri Ranasinghe, and Nihal Dissanayake alias Hinnimahattaya (Accused-Appellants) and the Attorney General (Respondent), the court addressed the issue of whether the convictions and sentences for the murder of Upalie Nishantha were justified in light of the trial evidence, including the credibility of the main eyewitness and the existence of common murderous intention among the accused. It was held that the convictions and sentences should be affirmed, confirming that contradictions and omissions in witness testimony must be material to undermine credibility, and that appellate courts should defer to trial court findings on issues of fact and witness credibility unless clear grounds exist for interference. The decision relied on standards governing