Attorney General v. Jinak Sri Uluwaduge and Another – sllr 1995 volume 1 page 157

In Attorney-General v. Jinak Sri Uluwaduge and another, the court addressed the revision of sentences for offences including cheating, theft, and using forged documents. It was held that sentences imposed for premeditated crimes aimed at wholesale profit must reflect the gravity of the offences and serve a deterrent effect, reasserting the principle that criminal sentencing is at the sole discretion of the Trial Judge but must account for public interest, the seriousness of the crime, and the proper administration of justice. Reliance was placed on relevant statutes and case law, including Attorney-General v. H. N. de Silva and Gomes v. Leelaratne, underscoring that sentence bargaining is not appropriate and that a balanced approach is required in sentencing to ensure adequacy and consiste