How selective public outrage can justify custodial deaths, reinforce state impunity

In June 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic, 59-year-old Jeyaraj and 31-year-old Bennicks were taken into police custody in Madurai for allegedly violating lockdown restrictions. After two days of being physically tortured by the police in Sathankulam town, the father and son died, sparking demonstrations and social media outrage.

Most often, such incidents are met with indifference or celebrated. For instance, the Telangana Police in December 2019 shot dead four men, accused of rape and murder, claiming that they were trying to escape. In this instance, the state’s use of violence to dispense “justice” was celebrated.

The contrasting responses to both incidents shows that public outrage rarely actually holds the state accountable.

Two custodial deaths

Custodial violence is shamefully routine in regular interactions between the police and people in India. The Sathankulam custodial murders are unusual because they disrupted the indifference that is the usual reaction to such violence.

After massive public anger, the Madras High Court took suo moto cognisance of the murders on June 24, 2020. This meant that it took action of its own accord without a petition being filed. The court was careful to ensure the integrity of the investigation. Most cases of custodial deaths linger before the judiciary, but the trial in the Sathankulam murders was wrapped up by March 23, 2026.

However, the public reaction to the extrajudicial killings in 2019...

Read more