Following the CBI telling the Madras High Court of closing the theft case against temple security guard B Ajit Kumar (29), a victim of alleged custodial death in Sivaganga, his mother Malathi demanded the arrest of Nikitha, on whose oral complaint of jewellery theft police had illegally detained him in June 2025.
CBI has told the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on February 4, informing the court that it has closed the theft case filed by J Nikitha against B Ajithkumar (29), a temple guard of Madapuram Badrakali Amman temple in Sivaganga, who was allegedly tortured to death by a special police team during interrogation in June 2025 during illegal detention. Police denied any torture, but subsequent videos that were released showed how he was tortured and taken to various places.
Addressing the media at Thirubuvanam, Malathi, along with her younger son Naveen Kumar and advocates Ganesh Kumar and Karthik Raja, questioned how Nikitha informed the police that Ajithkumar had committed the crime and how the police confirmed he had committed it and brutally assaulted him.
She said, “Was my son a terrorist? He wasn’t even provided water to drink. Is there any law that prevents the police from providing water and food to an ‘accused’? Aren’t they human? Why did they brutally assault him to death in a false case?”
Malathi said, “We need answers to questions like on whose direction the police personnel had beaten him to death and who was the authority behind the incident. The arrested policemen in the custodial death case must not be released, and no one responsible for the incident should be spared.”
“நிகிதா பொய் புகார் கொடுத்திருக்காங்க.
யார் சொல்லி அந்த புகார் கொடுத்தாங்க. பெரிய இடத்து உத்தரவு வந்ததால் நாங்கள் செய்தோம் என ஐந்து போலீசார் தெரிவிக்கிறார்கள். அப்படியென்றால் அந்தப் பெரிய இடம் என்பது யார்?" – மடப்புரம் அஜித்குமாரின் தாய் பேட்டி#CustodialDeath | #Ajith pic.twitter.com/3USJ5Vr7wK— PttvOnlinenews (@PttvNewsX) February 5, 2026
She said, “Police had beaten my son to death for no fault of his. I repeatedly asked the inspector and he promised my son would be let off by 6 pm. But I was only informed that he was no more. From day one, we (our family members) had insisted that Ajith Kumar was innocent. It should be revealed which officers backed the complainant and pressured the Sivaganga district police to probe her allegations. The CBI should summon them for a probe.”
Malathi further said, “The accused policemen remanded in judicial custody should not be enlarged on bail, as she feared they would tamper with evidence and threaten witnesses. The punishment for those involved in this should be severe enough that such a crime is never repeated and the law of the land should protect the victim’s kin. The pain of losing my son still remains. My son died as he was brutally assaulted by police. They treated my son like a terrorist. All policemen responsible for my son’s death should be punished. She asked that besides arresting Nikitha, the complainant, the CBI should find out on whose instructions she lodged a false complaint against Ajit Kumar and take action against those responsible.”
Malathi said, “I believe in CBI and we are satisfied with the investigations so far.” Her advocates said that the CBI’s clean chit has brought relief to Ajith Kumar’s family, who have been living with the stigma for the past six months.
He said, “Deceased’s family counsel, Ganesh Kumar, said the torture victims of the case Naveen Kumar, Praveen Kumar, Arun, and Vinoth are yet to receive their compensation. The post-mortem report revealed 44 injuries on Ajith’s body, including deep muscle contusions, haemorrhages in internal organs, and signs of prolonged blunt force trauma all of which established death due to torture.”
On December 12, 2025, the CBI filed a supplementary charge sheet naming four more police personnel as accused in the custodial death of Ajith Kumar. It included the then Manamadurai Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) N Shanmugasundaram, the then Thiruppuvanam Inspector Ramesh Kumar, the then Sub-Inspector Sivakumar, and the then Head Constable Ilayaraja. With this, the total number of police personnel accused in the case has increased to 10. The charge sheet was filed with the Fifth Additional District and Sessions Court in Madurai.
The CBI had earlier filed its first charge sheet on August 20, naming six police personnel — Prabhu, Kannan, Sankaran Manikandan, Raja, Anand, and Ramachandran, the driver of the police vehicle who transported Ajith Kumar.
CBI told the Madurai Bench on January 31 that the alleged jewellery theft case had been closed due to lack of evidence to Justice S Srimathy during the hearing of bail applications filed by the police personnel. She sought confirmation from the CBI on the status of the theft case and its validity.
The judge said, “So there is nothing. A person was beaten to death in a case where there was nothing. If any action would be taken against the complainant Nikitha, who was alleged to have instigated the incident.” The CBI said it will file a report before the court in this regard. The court adjourned the hearing on bail petitions.
CBI said, “A charge sheet and a supplementary charge sheet have been filed against 10 police personnel before the Fifth Additional District Sessions Court in Madurai. It said there are two cases — one for police excess and another for the theft case. The trial is going on.”
The law and order situation and police action in several cases across the state raise serious questions against the CM M.K. Stalin, who is also holding the Home Ministry that is responsible and accountable for the security and safety of its citizens. Critics argue that the DMK government is more interested in politicising any kind of issue as a rift between the central government and the state government, rather than focusing on real issues like the custodial death of Ajit and the subsequent closure of the case without any punishments.
