Madurai, Tamil Nadu: In a landmark and rare verdict that has sent shockwaves across the country, a Madurai court on Monday (April 6, 2026) sentenced nine policemen to death for the brutal custodial torture and murder of a father-son duo, P. Jayaraj (58) and his son J. Benicks (also referred to as Bennix or Benniks, aged around 31-38), in Thoothukudi district’s Sathankulam police station in June 2020.
The First Additional District and Sessions Judge G. Muthukumaran described the crime as one that “makes the heart shudder,” noting the extreme cruelty involved: the victims were stripped, ruthlessly assaulted, and subjected to severe torture over an extended period. The judge called it a “rarest of rare” case of abuse of authority by those meant to uphold the law, terming custodial deaths a “social evil.”
Background of the Case
The incident occurred during the strict COVID-19 lockdown. On June 19, 2020, Jayaraj and Benicks, who ran a mobile phone shop in Sathankulam, were arrested late at night for allegedly violating lockdown norms by keeping their shop open beyond permitted hours. What followed was a night of alleged brutal torture inside the police station.
Both father and son were badly injured and died in hospital days later — Jayaraj on June 22 and Benicks on June 23. Post-mortem reports and medical evidence pointed to severe injuries consistent with custodial violence. The case sparked nationwide outrage, protests, and widespread condemnation of police brutality, with demands for justice and police reforms.
A CBI investigation led to charges against multiple officers. On March 23, 2026, the court convicted all nine accused of murder and related offences. One policeman reportedly died during the prolonged trial.
The convicted officers include:
- Inspector S. Sridhar (then Sathankulam Station Inspector)
- Sub-Inspectors P. Raghu Ganesh and K. Balakrishnan
- Head Constables S. Murugan and A. Saamidurai
- Constables M. Muthuraj, S. Chelladurai, X. Thomas Francis, and S. Veilumuthu
Judge’s Strong Observations on Sentencing
While pronouncing the quantum of punishment, Judge Muthukumaran emphasised that life imprisonment would not be sufficient to deter such crimes, especially when committed by police personnel.
He reportedly observed that imposing the death penalty was the best option as “life imprisonment would not instill fear in the police officers.” The judge noted that when police themselves commit such heinous acts, the punishment must be exemplary to uphold public trust in the system. He added that ordinary citizens committing similar crimes might receive lesser punishment, but the uniform worn by the accused demanded stricter accountability.
The court also imposed a collective fine of ₹1.40 crore on the convicts, to be paid as compensation to the victims’ family.
Reactions and Significance
The verdict has been hailed by many as a strong message against police impunity in custodial violence cases, which remain a persistent issue in India despite laws and guidelines. Activists and legal experts see it as a potential deterrent, though some have pointed out that convictions in custodial death cases are still exceedingly rare in Tamil Nadu and elsewhere.
The accused are likely to appeal the sentence in the Madras High Court. Death penalties in India undergo rigorous judicial scrutiny at multiple levels.
This case remains a grim reminder of the horrors of custodial torture and the need for stronger safeguards, training, and accountability mechanisms within the police force.
