A case alleging custodial torture of a man by forest officials in Kerala has finally moved forward after 11 years, with a Thiruvananthapuram court taking cognisance of multiple charges against three Indian Forest Service (IFS) officers and five other forest officials.
Chief Judicial Magistrate NN Arun Bechu, in an order pronounced on August 19, rejected a Crime Branch report seeking to drop further proceedings after the government refused sanction to prosecute the accused public servants. The court held that no prior sanction was required as the alleged acts had no reasonable connection with the official duties of the accused.
The case involves Aji Bright, who was arrested in July 2015 in connection with an elephant ivory poaching case registered at the Edamalayar Forest Station and was allegedly tortured by forest officials while being illegally detained. Acting on a complaint by Aji, the court ordered summons to be issued to the accused.
While considering Aji’s objection to the report seeking closure of the case, the court said, “Custodial torture cannot attract any protection. The sanction refusal order suffers from a lack of application of mind. It reveals that the authority relied on the complainant’s alleged criminal antecedents.”
The court also rejected the argument that the alleged acts could be treated as excesses committed in the course of official duty.
“Here, the investigation has revealed no reasonable nexus between the acts complained of and the discharge of official duties,” the magistrate said. The court noted that this was not a case of alleged excess during an arrest, but one of custodial torture involving multiple rib fractures, illegal detention, destruction of evidence, and falsification of official records.
It all started when Aji surrendered before the Sreekaryam police station on July 11, 2015, in connection with the Edamalayar forest poaching case. According to the court order, forest officials took custody of Aji from the police station after executing a receipt and brought him to the Forest Headquarters at Vazhuthakkadu around 10.30 pm.
The order notes that Aji’s arrest was not recorded and that he was illegally detained.
According to the allegations recorded in the final report, Aji was beaten as soon as he stepped out of the vehicle. He was then allegedly taken inside the Forest Information Bureau, where eight officials assaulted him.
The court records allegations that one official stepped on Aji’s fingers and beat him with a bamboo stick, while another allegedly used an iron rod wrapped in cloth to beat his shoulders and a bamboo stick to assault his thighs. Other accused allegedly assaulted him with their fists and shoes. One official allegedly used an iron block wrapped in cloth to hit his back. The order also records the allegation that the assault caused fractures to his ribs and scapula. Aji was also allegedly forced to sign blank white papers.
Aji had earlier spoken to The News Minute about the alleged torture. In 2021, he told TNM that he was subjected to prolonged physical assault after being taken to the Forest Headquarters.
“A well-built officer was called in to “handle” me. They tortured me physically for 18 hours. Then Divisional Forest Officer (DFO), Thiruvananthapuram, T Uma, was watching the torture. They hit my head on the edge of the desk and attacked me continuously with a steel rod,” Aji had told TNM.
The court order names T Uma IFS, R Kamalahar IFS, K Vijayanandan IFS, T S Mathew, Jyothish J, T Sreejith, RB Arunkumar, and Anu Krishnan KS as the accused.
Medical evidence and witness account
The allegations of assault are supported by medical records referred to in the court order.
A Casualty Medical Officer at Muvattupuzha General Hospital examined Aji on August 1, 2015. The medical certificate recorded a CT scan showing a fracture of the left scapula and fractures of the right 10th, 11th, and 12th ribs.
The court noted that Aji had specifically told the doctor that he had been assaulted and manhandled by forest officers on July 11. The doctor said that the injuries could have been caused by an assault as described by Aji and observed that if they had resulted from an accident or fall, injuries would have been expected on other parts of the body as well.
The Crime Branch investigation also recorded the statement of Sureshkumar, who allegedly witnessed some of the officials torturing Aji and heard him crying. According to the witness statement, the officials were questioning Aji about idols and other articles allegedly made with ivory tusks.
The magistrate said Aji’s allegations received corroboration, at least prima facie, from the witness statement.
The court said the allegations indicated that Aji was assaulted and subjected to torture while in custody with the intention of compelling him to provide statements or confessions concerning the alleged ivory articles. It found that the allegations prima facie attracted Sections 330 and 331 of the IPC.
The original complaint was recorded from Muvattupuzha General Hospital, where Aji was examined following the alleged assault. A case was initially registered at the Muvattupuzha police station and later re-registered at the Museum police station in Thiruvananthapuram after it was determined that the alleged offences fell within its jurisdiction. The investigation was subsequently handed over to the Crime Branch.
The Crime Branch investigation concluded that offences under Sections 342, 348, 326, 330, 331, 167, 201, 403, and 34 of the IPC had been committed.
However, because the accused were public servants, the investigating officer sought government sanction for prosecution. The General Administration Department and Forest and Wildlife Department refused sanction through separate orders dated October 6 and November 10, 2025 respectively.
Following the refusal, the investigating officer filed a report stating that further action should be dropped. Aji objected to the report, arguing that the allegations related to custodial assault, wrongful confinement, and suppression and fabrication of records cannot be protected by the requirement of sanction.
The magistrate accepted that argument.
The court referred to the settled legal position that protection under Section 197 of the CrPC applies only when an alleged act has a reasonable and intrinsic connection with the discharge of official duty. It held that acts manifestly beyond official duty or wholly unconnected with it cannot claim such protection.
The court specifically held that the alleged custodial torture could not be considered an act performed in the discharge of official duty.
“The act of custodial torture inflicted by a police officer without justification on an arrestee cannot be shielded under the protective mantle of S.197 of CrPC,” the order states, referring to a Supreme Court ruling. “It can never be said that a police officer acts or purports to act in discharge of his official duty when he inflicts custodial torture on an arrestee.”
Applying that principle to the case, the magistrate held that the investigation had revealed no reasonable nexus between the alleged acts and the officials’ duties.
The court said the allegations involved not merely assault during an arrest but custodial torture resulting in multiple rib fractures, along with illegal arrest, destruction of evidence, and falsification of official records.
The custodial torture case had a long aftermath for Aji. In his interaction with TNM in 2021, he alleged that he was repeatedly implicated in cases after he stood by his allegations against the forest officials.
“When I get released on bail for a case, another would be charged against me. In all the cases, I appeared with the help of others as I was not able to walk. I had to travel from Thiruvananthapuram to Muvattupuzha, which is more than 200 km away, to appear before the court,” he had told TNM.
He also said he had been summoned twice by the Enforcement Directorate’s Kochi office. According to Aji, ED officials questioned him and made him write and sign declarations, but he was not informed why.
By then, Aji said he was unable to work and was struggling to support his family. He told TNM that he feared further repercussions for standing by his allegations.
“I am scared of what all I will have to face for saying the truth. They want to shut my mouth in court,” he had said.
Aji had also said that he eventually cancelled his bail and spent another three years in jail because he could not afford treatment or travel and legal expenses while being unable to work.
The latest order means the case will now proceed despite the government’s refusal to sanction prosecution.
The magistrate found sufficient prima facie material in the final report, Aji’s additional statement, and the statements of witnesses to disclose offences under Sections 167, 201, 326, 330, 331, 342, 348, and 403 of the IPC.
“Thus, on consideration of the allegations in the final report and the statements of the complainant and witnesses, there is sufficient material, prima facie, to disclose the commission of offences,” the court said.
The court took cognisance of the offences, took the case on file, and directed that summons be issued to the accused.