Supreme Court Issues Notice On CBI's Appeal Against Aqcuittal Of 4 Kerala Policemen In Udayakumar Custodial Death Case

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation challenging a judgment of the Kerala High Court which set aside the convictions and acquitted all accused in the 2005 Udayakumar custodial death case.

A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued notice returnable on 19^th May on CBI's SLP against four former police personnel who were tried in the case – Jitha Kumar K, T Ajith Kumar, EK Sabu and TK Haridas.

The case concerns the death of Udayakumar, a 28-year-old man, who was picked up by police personnel from Sreekandeshwaram Park, Thiruvananthapuram, at around 2:15 a.m. on September 27, 2005 and taken to the Fort Police Station.

He was thereafter taken to the office of the Circle Inspector, where he was subjected to custodial interrogation. He was declared dead at about 11:40 p.m. the same day at the Medical College Hospital. The post-mortem found severe crush injuries to both thighs as the cause of death.

According to the prosecution, Jitha Kumar, a police constable, along with another constable, assaulted Udayakumar inside the Circle Inspector's office. He was allegedly made to lie on a wooden bench, beaten with a bamboo cane on the soles of his feet and subjected to force using a GI pipe on his thighs, which resulted in crushing of the thigh muscles. The assault was stated to have continued for about one and a half hours.

The prosecution further alleged that after the custodial death, T Ajith Kumar (then Sub-Inspector), EK Sabu (then Circle Inspector), and TK Haridas (then Assistant Commissioner of Police), were involved in a conspiracy to shield those responsible. It was alleged that EK Sabu directed that entries in the General Diary be stopped at 7:30 p.m. to conceal the illegal detention and instructed that phone calls be diverted to prevent information from leaking.

It was further alleged that T Ajith Kumar, EK Sabu and TK Haridas coordinated the creation of false records, including a backdated FIR shown as registered at 8:00 p.m. though it was allegedly prepared after 3:00 a.m. the next day, and fabricated arrest memos, inspection memos, property registers and the remand application to support a false narrative of arrest. Subordinate police personnel were allegedly coerced by them into making these entries and later deposing in line with the fabricated records.

The investigation was initially conducted by the local police and CBCID and was later transferred to the CBI. The CBI conducted further investigation, added several accused and obtained pardon for certain police personnel who later deposed as approvers

The trial court found the accused guilty, sentencing the two principal accused [Jitha Kumar and Sreekumar (who died during the pendency of the appeal in the HC)] to death and convicting the senior officers for conspiracy and related offences.

The High Court, while deciding the death sentence reference under Section 366(1) of the CrPC along with the appeals against conviction filed by the accused, set aside the findings of guilt and acquitted all the accused.

The High Court opined that its binding directions as to the manner in which the trial was to proceed and the evidence to be appreciated were disregarded, and the earlier evidence was not taken into account.

It also concluded that the procedure adopted by CBI in seeking the tender of pardon in a case which had already been committed and trial was pending, by filing an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, is ex facie illegal.

Calling the investigation by CBI tainted, it observed,

“The high-handed and wholly illegal procedure adopted by the CBI, of converting an eyewitness, who had no real connection with the incident, into an approver; of indiscriminately arraying all witnesses and coercing them at gunpoint into becoming approvers; of extracting their assent on the condition that they parrot the CBI's version of events; of filing applications for tender of pardon before a Court lacking jurisdiction to entertain the same; and of laying a supplementary report before a Court equally devoid of jurisdiction, amounts to nothing short of a tainted and vitiated investigation.”

The Court thus, acquitted the accused, calling the investigation 'flawed' and 'tainted' which has led to the failure of the prosecution case.

Case no. – Diary No. 1892/2026

Case Title – Central Bureau of Investigation v. Jitha Kumar K