Follow TNM’s WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
TW: Mention of custodial violence and graphic details
Ajith Kumar never returned home after being taken into police custody on the evening of June 27. The 29‑year‑old security guard at the Badrakaliamman Temple in Tamil Nadu’s Sivaganga district was arrested by a six‑member ‘special police team’ over a complaint of alleged theft filed by two women. In the hours that followed, he was taken to remote locations and beaten brutally in front of his brother, resulting in his death. Ajith’s post-mortem report revealed that he died from a devastating combination of causes – excruciating pain and catastrophic blood loss.
The report states that Ajith’s body had at least 44 external injuries on the legs, arms, abdomen, and chest, along with signs of severe internal bleeding. For at least 19 of these wounds, the post-mortem observed that the ‘depth extends upto muscle’, which means that the contusion or bruise was not limited to the skin, but penetrated deep into the underlying muscle.
It also marked all his wounds as deep ones, extending into the muscles. Forensic experts told TNM that brutal violence was inflicted on the young man, and 44 may not be the exact number of injuries since many are overlapping, suggesting multiple beatings on the same spot.
Post‑mortem findings: What forensic experts say
Speaking to TNM, Professor Dr Dekal Varadharajulu, forensic surgeon and Head of the Forensics Department at the Kancheepuram Meenakshi Medical College, said that Ajith’s death must have been “extremely painful” and likely caused by “hypovolemic and pain shock.” Hypovolemic shock is caused by a severe decrease in blood volume, preventing the heart from pumping enough blood to meet the body’s needs.
Dr Dekal observed that the 44 injuries are only partially indicative of the number of wounds since many of them are overlapping. “Injuries numbered 13 to 18 show multiple overlapping beatings. Each stripe is not just one blow; each might have been five or more. That would mean at least 15 injuries in just that region. Since it is overlapping, it cannot be isolated,” he said.
One wound alone, which is the last one in the report, encompassed five distinct contusions, he noted, adding, “So the total number of injuries far exceeds the ones mentioned, and we can’t say how many injuries there are in an area because they are overlapping.”
He also pointed out that there is extensive internal bleeding associated with each external injury, which might have led to fatal blood loss. “Our body needs five litres of blood to circulate. If it drops below four, we die of hypovolemic shock. In this case, each injury was bleeding, so there must have been a huge volume of blood loss,” Dr Dekal said.
A government forensic expert, who did not want to be named, said that the contusions beneath the skin on Ajith’s head, with some haemorrhages and bleeding over the brain, are severe enough to kill a person purely from pain shock. “When this level of trauma is inflicted in a short span, it can lead to neurogenic or pain shock. Contusions, especially, are extremely painful,” he said.
Both experts added that while none of the injuries alone could have caused death, cumulatively–one added over the other– death would happen within a very short time.
Another senior forensic surgeon referred to the 2014 guidelines issued by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) for post-mortem examinations in cases of custodial violence. He said they were not followed in Ajith’s case.
“According to these guidelines, the autopsy report must follow a specific format that includes details such as the estimated time since death, cause, ante-mortem and post-mortem injuries, how injuries were caused, and whether the injuries individually or collectively are sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Even when the immediate cause cannot be precisely determined, these elements must be documented. In this case, the injuries recorded are sufficient to have caused death, with the head injury playing a critical role,” he said.
Why was Ajith arrested?
Ajith was initially detained by the Thiruppuvanam police on June 27, based on a theft complaint filed by two women – Sivakami and her daughter Nikita. The women alleged that 10 sovereigns of gold jewellery had gone missing from their car. According to the police, Ajith had helped them park the vehicle, but since he did not know how to drive, he had sought help from others before returning the keys.
Ajith was taken to the Thiruppuvanam police station, where he and four other temple staff members were questioned and later released. However, later that night, a six-member special police team picked them up again and took them to several isolated locations around Thiruppuvanam. The team allegedly drove them around through the night and subjected them to severe physical assault.
At around 4 am on June 28, Naveen Kumar was also picked up by the same team. In his statement to the Judicial Magistrate, Naveen recounted that Ajith was tied up and tortured in front of him at multiple locations, including near the Thiruppuvanam Veterinary Hospital, behind the Madapuram school hostel, and near a lake behind the local bus depot.
“He couldn’t bear the torture anymore and falsely admitted that he knew where the gold was hidden. But when the police took him there, he said he had lied,” Naveen said during the inquiry.
Ajith collapsed soon after, according to Naveen.
“They didn’t take us to the police station. We were driven around… they tied my brother’s hands and beat me for nearly half-an-hour, trying to make him confess,” Naveen Kumar, later told a Judicial Magistrate.
He was taken to a private hospital, where he was declared ‘brought dead’. His body was then shifted to the Government Rajaji Hospital in Madurai, where the post‑mortem began at 5.45 pm on June 29, lasting nearly four hours. The findings are devastating.
Ajith Kumar’s death marks the 24th custodial death recorded in Tamil Nadu under the DMK regime, a grim statistic that highlights a recurring pattern of violence and impunity in the state’s law enforcement.
‘Local police unsafe custodians of evidence’: HC bench
“Even an ordinary murderer would not have caused these many injuries,” observed Justices SM Subramaniam and AD Maria Clete of the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court, after seeing Ajith Kumar’s preliminary autopsy report on July 1.
Noting that the state had “conceded the custodial death”, the HC bench expressed alarm at possible tampering of evidence. The bench called the local police “unsafe custodians” of evidence, especially CCTV footage, and ordered all materials to be placed under independent judicial custody.
The HC ordered a judicial inquiry led by District Judge S John Sundarlal Suresh, with a report to be filed by July 8.
Meanwhile, five police officers from the special team – Raja, Anand, Sankaramanikandan, Praphu Ganesan, and Kannan – were arrested under Section 196(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, which pertains to custodial deaths.
SP Ashish Rawat was placed on compulsory wait, while DSP Shanumugasundaram of Manamadurai was suspended, and initial FIR records, which claimed Ajith Kumar suffered a seizure mid‑escape, were revised.
In the wake of public outrage, Chief Minister MK Stalin reached out to the family and announced the transfer of the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation. On July 2, Cooperation Minister KR Periyakaruppan handed over a technician job appointment letter to Naveen Kumar, and awarded their mother Malathi with a three‑cent land patta and Rs 5 lakh solatium.
With inputs from Shabbir Ahmed