Attorney General vs. Udaya De Silva and Others – sllr 2011 volume 2 page 102

In the case between the Attorney General and Udaya De Silva and others, the court addressed whether sentences imposed by the High Court upon convictions for serious economic and property offences were lawful and adequate as per statutory sentencing frameworks and judicial precedent. It was determined that the sentences originally imposed, involving improper suspensions and leniency, failed to reflect the gravity of the offences and public interest requirements established under the Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, and relevant case law. The court reaffirmed that while plea bargaining may be a recognized judicial practice, sentence bargaining is incompatible with judicial discretion and statutory mandates. The holding resulted in the imposition of enhanced sentences aligned more closely