Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Madras High Court judgment.
The judgment of the Madras High Court records the following account. Replace 'June 1992 the complainant atrocities' with 'June 1992 the complainant atrocities' and '18 the complainant women' with '18 the complainant women'. Note max sentence is 10 years RI under SC/ST Act s.3(2)(v) (para 4 table Sl.No.8), not 'up to 7 years' (7 years is the Sec 376 IPC component only). Totals '215 officials, including 84 police' are not stated in HC text (which speaks of 269 accused, confirms convictions) — retain only if trial-judgment citation added, else drop counts.
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 →By judgment dated 29 September 2023 in Crl.A. Nos. 618, 622, 624-626, 635, 649, 653-654, 657-660, 662, 665-666, 668-671, 673, 679, 682, 690, 692 of 2011, the Madras High Court (Coram: P. Velmurugan, J., J.) affirmed the conviction of the L. Nadhan & 83 other police personnel (Various ranks), and directed payment of compensation of Rs 180 lakh (Rs 1,80,00,000).
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
The Madras High Court judgment dated 29 September 2023 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
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.
Holding not recorded separately.
“In view of the above discussion and for the foregoing reasons, this Court finds all the accused have committed the charged offences. There are no merits in these appeals and the same are liable to be dismissed.” (para 104)
The trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Madras High Court judgment.
The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
(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.
These records are listed together because they share a state or a topic. That does not mean they are connected.