Delivering justice to the unfortunate victims of police brutality requires a combination of an actively engaged judiciary, the courage of victims and witnesses to speak out against the khaki fraternity, and determined investigations to gather conclusive evidence. All these factors are perfectly aligned to reveal the truth behind the custodial murder of innocent businessman Jayaraj and his son Benicks, who were tortured six years ago at the Sattankulam Police Station in Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu. Based on the CBI’s scientific evidence, despite earlier attempts to destroy it, a Madurai court has now convicted all nine police officers accused in the case. The tenth accused had already died of COVID-19. While giving the death penalty to convicts is contrary to the principle of rehabilitative justice, the conviction sends a strong signal to those in uniform who assume the power to use force against unarmed citizens as if it were a legal right. This case could have been passed off as another suspicious death in custody but for the overwhelming evidence of torture and public outrage. The police detained Jayaraj on a false charge of violating the terms of the lockdown during the pandemic, and Benicks was detained later when he confronted them for assaulting his father. Both men were stripped, brutally beaten overnight and even forced to clean their own blood with their clothes. After registering an FIR on trumped-up charges, the injured men were produced before a government doctor, who dubiously issued a “fit for custody” report. The judge in charge too mechanically sent them to judicial custody, which ultimately led to their death.
That the officers felt justified was evident when the magistrate found the atmosphere at the station hostile and “intimidating”. Justices PN Prakash and B. Pugalendhi of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, taking suo motu, extraordinary direction, asked the revenue officials to take control of the station and secure the evidence. The turning point came when Chief Constable Revathi testified against his colleagues. The CBI found that blood samples obtained from the station matched the victims’ DNA, while call data records confirmed the presence of both the victims and the accused at the time of the crime, thus closing the case. The trial court apparently applied uniform proportionality in assigning culpability to all the accused. This may not stand up to scrutiny in higher courts, as seen in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, where the Supreme Court in 1999 upheld the death sentences of only four of the 26 convicted by the TADA court. Nevertheless, the convictions should help raise the police’s awareness that excesses will not go unpunished.
Published – 8 Apr 2026 0:10 AM IST
