Jayaweera and Another vs. Attorney General – sllr 2019 volume 3 page 315

In the case between Harison Jayaweera and Sunil Shantha alias Ruwan (accused-appellants) and the Attorney General (respondent), the court addressed the sufficiency and reliability of accomplice evidence (PW 01) in the context of convictions for murder and robbery. It was determined that minor discrepancies present in the accomplice’s testimony did not undermine its reliability when corroborated by independent evidence. The court examined whether evidence from a pardoned accomplice could be lawfully relied upon, reviewed procedural objections, and found that the trial process and evidentiary handling remained within the bounds of established legal standards. The convictions and sentences were affirmed, reinforcing the principle that substantial corroboration can validate accomplice evidence