It took nearly six years. More than one hundred witnesses were examined. Thousands of pages of evidence were placed on record. A family waited through years of legal proceedings after losing two members within days.
On April 6, 2026, a Sessions Court in Madurai delivered its verdict in the Sathankulam custodial deaths case, sentencing nine police personnel to death.
The case relates to the deaths of P. Jeyaraj and his son J. Bennix, who died in June 2020 following their detention by the police in Sathankulam, Tamil Nadu.
The court classified the case under the “rarest of rare” category, citing the nature of the incident and the role of the accused, who were serving police personnel at the time.
What happened in June 2020
The incident dates back to June 19, 2020. Jeyaraj ( Father Age, 59) and Bennix (Son Age, 31), who were running a small mobile phone shop in Sathankulam, were taken into custody for allegedly violating COVID-19 lockdown restrictions related to shop timings.
According to the investigation conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation, both individuals were detained at the Sathankulam police station.
The chargesheet alleged that the two were subjected to repeated physical assault while in custody. Witness statements and other evidence placed before the court indicated that force was used over several hours during the night.
Testimony during the trial also suggested that attempts were made to clean the premises the following morning.
Both individuals were later taken to the Government Hospital in Kovilpatti.
Bennix died on June 22, 2020. Jeyaraj died on June 23, 2020. The deaths led to widespread public attention and calls for an independent investigation.
Timeline of events
- June 19, 2020 (Evening): Jeyaraj and Bennix are taken into custody for alleged lockdown violations
- June 19–20 (Night): Alleged custodial assault takes place inside the police station
- June 20, 2020: Both are produced before a magistrate
- June 21, 2020: Health condition reportedly deteriorates
- June 22, 2020: Bennix dies at Kovilpatti Government Hospital
- June 23, 2020: Jeyaraj dies at the same hospital
The incident subsequently triggered protests and drew attention from civil society and legal institutions.
Investigation and trial
Following public outcry, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court took suo motu cognisance of the matter. The investigation was later transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation to ensure an independent probe.
Key aspects of the investigation:
- A primary chargesheet running into over 2,000 pages was filed in 2020
- A supplementary chargesheet was filed in 2022
- More than 100 witnesses were examined during the trial
- The trial continued for over five years
The accused were charged under provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including:
- Section 302 (Murder)
- Section 342 (Wrongful confinement)
- Section 201 (Destruction of evidence)
- Section 34 (Common intention)
Out of 10 accused personnel, 9 were convicted. One accused died during the pendency of the trial.
The accused and findings
The convicted individuals included officers of different ranks, from inspector to constable, who were posted at the Sathankulam police station at the time of the incident. The court examined witness testimonies, medical reports, forensic evidence, and documentary records during the trial. According to the findings, the injuries sustained by the victims were consistent with custodial violence, and the deaths were linked to those injuries. The court also considered allegations relating to the handling of evidence and the sequence of events following the detention.
The verdict and sentence
On March 23, 2026, the Sessions Court found all nine accused guilty of murder and related offences. The sentencing was reserved at that stage.
On April 6, 2026, the court pronounced the sentence.
Sentence awarded:
- Death penalty for all nine convicted police personnel
- Combined fine of approximately ₹1.40 crore
- Compensation to be paid to the victims’ family
The court observed that the role of law enforcement carries a duty to protect citizens, and any violation of that responsibility requires strict scrutiny under the law.
It further noted that the case involved a serious abuse of authority and had significant consequences for the victims and their family.
Legal significance
The judgment is being seen as an important development in cases involving custodial violence.
It reiterates that the protection of life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution applies to all individuals, including those in custody.
The application of the “rarest of rare” doctrine in this case reflects the court’s assessment of the gravity of the offence.
Legal experts note that convictions in custodial death cases are relatively uncommon, and the imposition of capital punishment makes this case particularly notable.
What happens next
As per legal procedure, a death sentence awarded by a Sessions Court must be confirmed by the Madras High Court.
The convicted individuals have the right to appeal the judgment before the High Court. Further appeals may also be made before the Supreme Court of India.
The confirmation process and appeals will determine the final outcome of the sentence.
Broader impact
The case has drawn attention to issues related to custodial practices and police accountability.
Legal observers suggest that the judgment may contribute to ongoing discussions around:
- Safeguards during arrest and detention
- Documentation and monitoring of custodial procedures
- Institutional accountability mechanisms
Bodies such as the National Human Rights Commission may also examine the implications of the ruling in the context of existing guidelines.
Conclusion
The Sathankulam custodial deaths case remains one of the most closely followed cases involving allegations of custodial violence in recent years.
With the Sessions Court delivering its judgment after a prolonged trial, the matter now moves to the next stage of judicial review.
The case continues to hold legal and institutional significance, particularly in the context of accountability and protection of fundamental rights.
Disclaimer
The conviction and sentence are subject to judicial review. The accused have the right to appeal, and the death penalty will require confirmation by the High Court.