Ajith Kumar custodial death: Trial court remands four cops

MADURAI: A trial court on Thursday remanded four police personnel, including a former deputy superintendent of police (DSP), in judicial custody until September 16, citing the possibility that they could influence witnesses and tamper with evidence in the case of the custodial death of B Ajith Kumar, a temple guard, at Madapuram in Sivaganga district in June 2025.

Ajith Kumar, a guard at Madapuram Badrakali Amman temple, was arrested based on a theft complaint and subsequently tortured to death in police custody.

The V Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai, Judge V Dhamodharan, framed charges, including murder, under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, against the four accused (A7 to A10) — former Manamadurai DSP N Shanmugasundaram, inspector SP Ramesh Kumar, special sub-inspector S Sivakumar and head constable G Ilayaraja.

The court noted that Shanmugasundaram has been under suspension, while Ramesh Kumar is serving as inspector with the Manamadurai police and Sivakumar and Ilayaraja are serving at the Sivaganga Town police station.

The alleged crime of the accused and the positions they hold are relevant factors in this case. “This court is of the view that the outside custody of A7 to A10, at this stage, raises a reasonable apprehension of the possibility of influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence,” the judge observed.

The court said the apprehension was based on the gravity and nature of the offences — the allegations of custodial death, the previous conduct of the accused, the nature of material witnesses and allegations of tampering with police records.

Referring to the prosecution's case, the court observed that the four accused are not ordinary persons. The police personnel had already attempted to create false entries in the public records to conceal the commission of the crime. Moreover, the prosecution has also alleged that Shanmugasundaram (A7), with the help of local politicians, attempted to reach an out-of-court settlement with the parents of the deceased immediately after his custodial murder, said the court, adding it was also alleged that the accused destroyed their mobile phones to destruct evidence.

The defence counsel argued that the accused should not be remanded merely because they had not obtained bail, and they had been regularly appearing before the court and would not tamper with the evidence. However, the CBI opposed it, stating that three accused personnel are still serving in police stations. It further submitted that the witness protection extended to Naveen Kumar, the brother of the deceased and a key eyewitness, had been withdrawn by the present Thiruppuvanam inspector Sethumani Madhavan.

The court then pointed out that Shanmugasundaram allegedly constituted a special investigation team comprising A1 to A6 and took Ajith Kumar into illegal custody in connection with an alleged jewellery theft.

The court observed that accused 8 is alleged to have registered a false FIR with the intention to cover up the murder. It is further alleged that A9 and A10 fabricated and manipulated the general diary 9/10 entries of the Thirupuvanam police station and that A9, Sivakumar, fabricated an ante-dated Community Service Register (CSR) entry on the complaint allegedly made by one Nikita.

On the question of their bail, the court observed that though they have appeared before this court for several hearings, they have not chosen to file any application.