INTRODUCTION
Invoking the ‘Rarest of the Rare’ Doctrine established in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684 a trial Court in Madurai has sentenced nine police personnel to death penalty for their involvement in the 2020 Sathankulam custodial muder. The officers had arrested and brutally tortured and resulted in the death of a trader Jayaraj and his son Benicks in Tamil Nadu, which happens to be one of the most brutal and shocking instances of abuse of state power in the State in recent years.
The verdict is welcomed with mixed reactions and has raised constitutional and ethical concerns.
BACKGROUND
The incident took place on a fateful night of June 2020 in Sathankulam, Thoothukudi district of Tamil Nadu. Jayaraj was picked up by the police officers for violating the COVID – 19 lockdown restrictions placed on shops. When his son questioned the actions of the police he was also detained by the officers.
Jayaraj and Benicks were subjected to immense torture and inhuman treatments throughout the night; They were even asked to wipe off their own blood from the floor using their clothes. Both of them sustained 13 and 12 injuries respectively and were later on subjected to medical examination, from where they both received ‘fit for remand’ certifications and accordingly the District Magistrate remanded them to judicial custody. Jayaraj and his son Benicks succumbed to their injuries a few days later. Following media and public outcry the Madras High Court took suo motu cognisance of the case.
KEY POINTS
- The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the revenue officials to take over the police station to preserve evidence.
- A woman police constable testified against her colleagues.
- The CBI undercovered strong evidence against the officers accused of the crime including blood stains which were later confirmed matches with the DNA of Jayaraj and Benicks.
- It also shed light into the ‘fit for remand’ medical certificate issued by the doctor and the remand order issued by the Magistrate.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
The trial court awarded the death penalty to all the nine accused, holding that this is a ‘Rarest of the Rare’ incident. Thus, emphasising the brutality and disregard for human dignity of the crime.
The court held that the custodial torture and subsequent death of father and son is not merely an act of individual violence rather it is a grave violation of fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Legal experts anticipate the verdict to undergo rigorous scrutiny in the appellant courts as convicting all the nine accused for death raises questions of proportionality and individualised sentencing.
CONCLUSION
Though the trial court’s verdict has sparked a constitutional debate on the raising the questions of proportionality and ethical concerns, one message has been sent across without doubt, abuse of power by law enforcement agencies will not go unseen and unpunished.
The case also shed light into the need for better systemic reforms, protection for whistleblowers, judicial vigilance and police accountability.
“PRIME LEGAL is a National Award-winning law firm with over two decades of experience across diverse legal sectors. We are dedicated to setting the standard for legal excellence in civil, criminal, and family law.”
WRITTEN BY: AARSHITHA UNNIKRISHNAN
