Bimbirigodage Sujith Lal vs. Hon. Attorney General – CA 38/2006-2014

In the case between Bimbirigodage Sujith Lal (Accused-Appellant) and the Hon. Attorney General (Complainant-Respondent), the court addressed whether a conviction and sentence for murder should be set aside for procedural non-compliance with Section 195(ee) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act—specifically, the failure to record the accused’s trial preference. The court determined that, in light of the procedural irregularity and the prolonged lapse of time since the incident, the appropriate remedy was to acquit the accused and set aside the conviction and sentence. This ruling reaffirmed the principle that fundamental procedural requirements are mandatory and that undue delays—especially those not attributable to the accused—can render a retrial unjust. The decision relied on relevant st