9 Convicted In Jayaraj-Benicks Custodial Torture Case Get Death Penalty In Tamil Nadu

Nearly six years after the custodial torture and deaths of Thoothukudi traders P Jayaraj and his son J Benicks shocked the country, a court in Tamil Nadu's Madurai district on Monday awarded the death sentence to nine policemen convicted in the case. The verdict closes one of the most disturbing police brutality cases of the COVID-19 lockdown period, a case that sparked nationwide outrage, protests, and a prolonged legal battle involving the Madras High Court and the CBI.

From Lockdown Detention To A National Outrage

The case dates back to June 19, 2020, when Jayaraj and Benicks, who ran a mobile phone shop in Sattankulam, were picked up by police for allegedly keeping their shop open beyond permitted hours during the lockdown. Later investigations found that the claim was false.

According to the prosecution's account, the incident began after police allegedly abused workers waiting near a nearby shop for their wages on the previous night. Jayaraj is said to have intervened after hearing about the verbal abuse, and that information was passed on to other policemen.

The next evening, police picked up Jayaraj from the shop. When Benicks rushed to the Sattankulam police station seeking his father's release, he too was detained. What followed, investigators said, was a night of brutal custodial torture inside the station.

Both men suffered severe injuries. Their family members were initially told they would be released the next morning and were even asked to bring fresh clothes. Instead, on June 20, the father and son were taken for medical examination, their blood-soaked clothes were changed, and they were produced before a judicial magistrate before being remanded to Kovilpatti Sub-Jail.

Injuries, Hospitalisation And Deaths That Triggered Protests

Soon after being lodged in jail, both men developed serious health complications and were shifted to Kovilpatti Government Hospital.

On June 22, Benicks reportedly suffered uncontrollable bleeding due to a haemorrhage and died after becoming unconscious. A day later, on June 23, Jayaraj complained of chest pain and also died.

The deaths triggered massive public anger across Tamil Nadu and beyond. Human rights groups, activists, and civil society organisations condemned the brutality, while questions were also raised over how the judicial remand was granted and how the medical examination had been conducted despite the visible injuries.

Madras High Court Stepped In, CBI Took Over Probe

As outrage grew, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court took suo motu cognisance of the case on June 24, 2020. A Division Bench initiated proceedings, ordered a judicial inquiry, and said it would monitor developments while urging the public to remain calm.

The court expressed lack of confidence in the local police and directed the CB-CID to temporarily take over the probe until the CBI formally assumed charge. The then AIADMK government later transferred the case to the CBI.

A report submitted by the Kovilpatti Judicial Magistrate to the High Court painted a troubling picture. It said Sattankulam police personnel did not cooperate with the inquiry, created an intimidating atmosphere, delayed producing documents, and displayed indifference even in the magistrate's presence.

The report also flagged that the police station CCTV system appeared to have been calibrated in a way that footage would be overwritten the next day. As a result, there was no recording of the day of the incident despite adequate storage space. Crucially, a woman police constable later told the court that the traders had been tortured through the night.

Taking serious note, the High Court directed the Thoothukudi Collector to secure the police station, preserve evidence, and ensure forensic teams collected material for the CBI probe. It also initiated contempt proceedings against three policemen for not cooperating with the judicial inquiry, though those proceedings were later closed after unconditional apologies were tendered.

The judges also ensured protection for head constable S Revathy, whose statement became a crucial part of the case record.

What The CBI Chargesheet Alleged

The CBI filed its main chargesheet on September 25, 2020, followed by a supplementary chargesheet on August 12, 2022. In all, 10 police personnel were named as accused, but one of them, Special Sub-Inspector Pauldurai, died after contracting COVID-19. The agency prosecuted the remaining nine.

Those convicted include the then Inspector S Sridhar, Sub-Inspectors P Raghu Ganesh and K Balakrishnan, head constables S Murugan and A Saamidurai, and constables M Muthuraj, S Chelladurai, X Thomas Francis, and S Veilumuthu.

According to the CBI, Jayaraj and Benicks were subjected to "brutal torture" by policemen who knew the assault was severe enough to cause death. The agency said Jayaraj was taken from his shop near the Kamaraj statue at around 7.30 pm on June 19, 2020, as part of a criminal conspiracy allegedly hatched by the accused.

When Benicks objected to his father being beaten, both were allegedly wrongfully confined and assaulted "to teach them a lesson" for questioning the police. The torture, investigators said, continued for several hours overnight.

The chargesheet further alleged that the two men were made to clean the blood from their own wounds. The next morning, a sanitation worker was allegedly asked to clean blood from the station floor to destroy evidence. The CBI also said a false case was registered against them.

Investigators said a "fit for remand" certificate was obtained despite their grave injuries, and the blood-stained clothes were dumped in the dustbin of the Sattankulam Government Hospital. Even while being produced before the medical officer and later before the magistrate, the two were said to be limping and unable to sit properly.

Trial Delays, Bail Pleas And Final Conviction

The legal process stretched for years. In March 2021, while hearing a petition by J Selvarani, Jayaraj's wife and Benicks's mother, the High Court directed the trial court to complete proceedings within six months, observing that "justice delayed is justice denied" and "justice hurried is justice buried".

Still, the case saw repeated extensions.

In 2023, the High Court granted more time after noting that the post of presiding officer was vacant and the matter was being handled by the Additional District Judge for CBI cases in Madurai as an additional charge.

In June 2025, during a hearing on a bail petition filed by the prime accused, the High Court was told that the accused had personally participated in the trial and cross-examined witnesses over lengthy hearings. The Judicial Magistrate was cross-examined over 26 hearings between October 16, 2023 and February 2, 2024, while the Investigating Officer was cross-examined over 21 hearings between March 27, 2024 and September 26, 2024.

The High Court was informed that the strategy appeared aimed at delaying the case and preventing disposal of the trial. Multiple bail petitions filed by the accused were dismissed, and the policemen remained lodged in Madurai Central Prison.

Prime accused Sridhar also moved the trial court seeking to turn approver, but the plea was rejected. Selvarani opposed the move, saying it was meant to delay proceedings, and the CBI argued that Sridhar was the main conspirator and could not be treated as an approver.

Court Awards Death Sentence To All Nine Convicts

On March 23, 2026, the First Additional District and Sessions Court in Madurai convicted all nine accused policemen of murder and other offences under the Indian Penal Code. Judge G Muthukumaran had then reserved the question of punishment and sought medical reports, last property statements, salary certificates, and submissions from the Union and State governments on aggravating and mitigating circumstances.

On Monday, April 6, the court pronounced the quantum of punishment and awarded the death sentence to all nine convicted policemen.

The sentencing marks a dramatic end to a case that became a symbol of custodial violence in India, raised sharp questions over police accountability, and forced judicial intervention at multiple levels. For the family of Jayaraj and Benicks, the verdict comes after nearly six years of waiting through repeated delays, procedural hurdles, and an emotionally exhausting trial.