Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Supreme Court of India judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: (2011) 7 SCC 745
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2011-0004Cuddalore, Tamil NaduJudgment 29 March 2011
Mehboob Batcha and Others vs State Rep. by Superintendent of Police
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of police personnel convicted for the brutal May-June 1992 atrocities at Annamalai Nagar Police Station, where suspect a man was tortured to death with lathis and his wife the complainant was subjected to barbaric custodial gang-rape. Affirming the concurrent convictions by the trial court and the Madras High Court, the bench led by Justice Markandey Katju held the testimonies of 37 prosecution witnesses, particularly the harrowing account of victim the complainant, to be credible beyond reasonable doubt. The Court strongly criticized the failure of lower courts and investigators to frame charges under Section 302 IPC for murder, observing that custodial killings by police are rarest of rare crimes deserving the death penalty, but upheld the 10-year rigorous imprisonment sentences under Section 376(2)(a) IPC as well as convictions for wrongful confinement and voluntarily causing hurt. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 29 March 2011 in Criminal Appeal No. 1511 of 2003, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: Markandey Katju, J., Gyan Sudha Misra, J., JJ.) affirmed the conviction of 6 police personnel, namely: Mehboob Batcha (Sub-Inspector); Sub-Inspector (SHO), Annamalai Nagar Police Station; A-3 (Head Constable); A-6 (Constable); A-8 (Constable); A-10 (Constable).
- Register number
- TN 31 CW 0006
- Case reference
- Criminal Appeal No. 1511 of 2003 / (2011) 7 SCC 745
- Court and date
- Supreme Court of India (Coram: Markandey Katju, J., Gyan Sudha Misra, J., JJ.), 29 March 2011
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Mehboob Batcha (Sub-Inspector); Sub-Inspector (SHO), Annamalai Nagar Police Station; A-3 (Head Constable); A-6 (Constable); A-8 (Constable); A-10 (Constable)
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 376(2)(a) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 343 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 348 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 330 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 218 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 220 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Both the trial Court and the High Court have found the appellants guilty and we see no reason to disagree with their verdict. To prove the charges the prosecution examined as many as 37 witnesses, and they have proved the …” (at para 5)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: imprisonment; maximum substantive term of 10.0 years.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Supreme Court of India judgment dated 29 March 2011 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
Custodial torturePrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Both the trial Court and the High Court have found the appellants guilty and we see no reason to disagree with their verdict. To prove the charges the prosecution examined as many as 37 witnesses, and they have proved the …” (para 5)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
29 Mar 2011
Order issued
ConcludedThe Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: (2011) 7 SCC 745
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.