Umagilige Inoka Shayamalee vs. The Hon. Attorney General – CA/HCC/226 A-B/2015-2024

In the case between the Accused-Appellants (1st and 2nd Appellants) and the Hon. Attorney General, the court addressed the legality of amending an indictment without due explanation to the appellants, the propriety of admitting further witness evidence after the defence case was closed, and discrepancies in the prosecution’s handling of heroin evidence—including weight inconsistencies implicating the chain of custody. It was held that the trial process was compromised by these procedural and evidential irregularities, necessitating the setting aside of the convictions and sentences. The decision reaffirmed that strict compliance with procedural safeguards in criminal proceedings is essential, particularly regarding the amendment of indictments and the handling of physical evidence, in acco