Chutimalli and Another vs. State – sllr 2010 volume 2 page 158

In the case between Chutlmalli and Another (accused-appellants) and the State, the court addressed the issue of whether, in cases where there are contradictory portions in a witness’s statement, the prosecution or defence is entitled to mark previously unexamined portions during re-examination to clarify any misleading impressions, and whether the unmarked contradiction (specifically marked as “V3”) in a witness statement created reasonable doubt as to the identity of the accused. It was determined that the failure to mark relevant unexamined portions of the witness statement created reasonable doubt regarding the accused’s identification. The conviction and death sentence were set aside with an order for a re-trial before the High Court Judge of Hambantota, to be heard expeditiously. The