A. A. Kamal Nishantha and A. Nandana Chandrakumara v. Hon. Attorney General – CA NO. 96/2010-2014

In the case between A. A. Kamal Nishantha and A. Nandana Chandrakumara (Accused-Appellants) and the Hon. Attorney General (Complainant-Respondent), the court addressed the safety of the convictions for attempted robbery in light of procedural and evidentiary deficiencies. It was held that the convictions were unsafe due to unreliable identification evidence and breaches of procedural requirements under Section 48 of the Judicature Act, reaffirming the principle that a fair trial requires strict adherence to evidentiary and procedural safeguards. The decision relied on statutory mandates and precedent regarding fair trial standards, emphasizing that convictions cannot be sustained where substantial doubt exists about identity and the integrity of proceedings is compromised.

Anil Gooneratne