On Monday, all nine police officials found guilty in the 2020 case involving the custodial deaths of trader P Jayaraj, aged 58, and his son J Benicks, aged 31, in the Tamil Nadu town of Sattankulam were sentenced to death by the First Additional District and Sessions Court in Madurai.
Judge G Muthukumaran delivered the death sentences to the convicted individuals, which included then inspector S Sridhar; sub-inspectors K Balakrishnan and P Raghu Ganesh; head constables S Murugan and A Samadurai; as well as constables M Muthuraja, S Chelladurai, X Thomas Francis, and S Vailmuthu.
The tenth accused, former special sub-inspector Paldurai, who had also been implicated in the case, passed away due to Covid-19 in August 2020.
Nearly six years after the tragic incident, in which the father and son were subjected to severe mistreatment while in police custody at Sathankulam police station, the court had previously determined on March 23 that all nine officers were guilty of double homicide.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) submitted its initial charges against the nine policemen on September 25, 2020, followed by a supplementary chargesheet on August 12, 2022.
According to investigators, Jayaraj and his son were arrested during the Covid-19 lockdown in June 2020 and succumbed to their injuries days later, having endured extensive torture at the police station.
This case quickly escalated beyond a mere local crime narrative, raising critical questions about the accountability of the Tamil Nadu Police regarding a culture of violence that has long been accepted in silence, official denials, and standard remand procedures.
The CBI’s chargesheet indicated that Jayaraj had not actually breached lockdown regulations for which he had been detained. Investigators revealed that he was arrested from his shop near the Kamaraj statue around 7:30 PM on June 19, 2020, as part of a criminal conspiracy orchestrated by the accused officers. When Benicks attempted to intervene and objected to his father’s treatment, both were unlawfully confined and assaulted throughout the night, as per the CBI’s findings, to “teach them a lesson on how to interact with police.”
Furthermore, the CBI reported that the father and son were forced to clean their own wounds. The following morning, a sanitation worker was instructed to erase evidence by cleaning the blood from the station floor. A false case was subsequently filed against them, and a “fit for remand” certificate was procured despite their visible injuries. Their blood-stained clothing was discarded in a hospital waste bin.
In a comprehensive series of reports, The Indian Express detailed the timeline from arrest to death through the accounts of witnesses, family members, police narratives, and court documents, shedding light on the harrowing events that transpired.
One account recounted how Jayaraj was taken into custody after allegedly criticizing a police patrol team that was enforcing early shop closures during the lockdown. Another highlighted the retaliatory mindset behind the violence, as police claimed that Benicks’s attempt to protect his father had “provoked” the officers involved.
The accounts were striking not only for their brutality but also for their banality. Family members waiting outside the station observed the condition of the two men the following morning, noting that Jayaraj’s veshti and Benicks’s pants were drenched in blood. Relatives were asked to provide dark-colored lungis as they struggled to keep their clothes from falling due to excessive bleeding.
One of the most haunting aspects of the case emerged when S Joseph, Jayaraj’s brother-in-law, described how the two men were not appropriately presented to the magistrate for injury assessments before being remanded. Instead, the magistrate, who was operating from his residence at the time, merely gestured to the policemen to proceed with the remand. Joseph recalled, “When Jayaraj and Benicks were brought to the magistrate’s court, they were visibly injured, with blood seeping through their clothes.” He noted that they were positioned near the entrance, encircled by police officers, and the magistrate waved his hand from an upstairs balcony to signify their remand.
This lack of thorough oversight—a mere glance from a balcony and a quick hand gesture—resulted in two injured men being sent further into the justice system.
They were subsequently placed in the Kovilpatti sub-jail and later transferred to a government hospital as their health deteriorated. Benicks succumbed to severe bleeding on June 22, followed by Jayaraj’s death the next day.
The tragic deaths sparked widespread protests across Tamil Nadu and garnered national attention. Shopkeepers closed their stores, human rights advocates condemned the brutality, and concerns were raised regarding the broader police system and its inherent cruelty.
On June 24, 2020, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court took notice of the case, ordering a judicial inquiry and expressing skepticism about the local police’s involvement. The court directed the CB-CID to investigate until the CBI officially took over. A judicial magistrate’s inspection of the police station revealed a lack of cooperation from the Sattankulam police, who allegedly attempted to intimidate witnesses. Key documents were delayed, and CCTV footage from the day of the incident was reported missing, despite available storage capacity. A female head constable later testified that the father and son had endured torture throughout the night.
The High Court determined there was sufficient initial evidence to support murder charges and initiated contempt proceedings against police personnel who failed to cooperate with the inquiry. The judges also took steps to ensure the safety of the female head constable, S Revathy, whose testimony was vital to the case.
In March 2021, the High Court mandated that the trial should be concluded within a six-month timeframe, while emphasizing the need for accountability and justice.
