Kerala Court Convicts BJP Leader in 2020 POCSO Case After Five Probes and Public Protests

A Kerala POCSO court has convicted BJP leader K Padmarajan for sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl in Palathayi. The 2020 case saw multiple probes, public protests, and political controversy. The sentence is set for November 15.

Kannur: A special court in Kerala has convicted K Padmarajan, a BJP leader from Kadavathur, for sexual assaulting his own student in Kannur's Palathayi. The Thalassery Fast Track POCSO court delivered the guilty verdict on Friday, November 14, marking Children's Day. The 49-year-old accused, who served as former president of Thrippangottur panchayat, has been convicted under section 376 AB for rape and provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. These charges carry severe penalties, including possible life imprisonment or death sentence. The sentencing hearing is set for Saturday, November 15.

Case Background

According to prosecution evidence, the incidents occurred three times during January 2020, when he allegedly took the 10-year-old girl to the school restroom. The child initially disclosed the abuse to Childline on March 17, 2020, naming Padmarajan as the perpetrator. After the complaint was forwarded by Thalassery Deputy Superintendent of Police to Panur police, the preliminary investigation concluded the allegations were unfounded. This determination sparked widespread public protests demanding action against the accused.

On April 15, 2020, police arrested Padmarajan from a hideout at a relative's home in Poyilur Vilakottur. Following public pressure and High Court intervention, the Crime Branch assumed control of the investigation. The case passed through five different investigation teams. The Crime Branch filed their chargesheet shortly before the 90-day statutory deadline, initially omitting POCSO Act provisions. The comprehensive final chargesheet including POCSO sections was submitted in May 2021.

Several issues complicated the investigation. The child was unable to recall precise dates of the assaults, which some police officials allegedly used to undermine her testimony. The first information report listed a date when records showed the accused was on leave, a date reportedly provided by police to counselors and the medical examiner. When the case was initially registered under less stringent legal provisions, Padmarajan secured bail after 90 days. The survivor's's mother then approached the High Court seeking justice. Crime Branch Inspector General S Sreejith created another controversy by publicly revealing confidential details from the child's statement. When the survivor's's family and support groups sought bail cancellation, the investigating team initially filed a report suggesting the child's account was unreliable. Crime Branch Deputy Superintendent T.P. Ratnakumar eventually submitted the final POCSO chargesheet.

Conclusion to One-Year-Long Trial

The trial began in February 2024. Judge MT Jalaja Rani heard evidence from 40 prosecution witnesses, including the survivor herself, and reviewed 77 documents plus 14 material exhibits. The defense presented three witnesses, including the counselor who recorded the child's initial statement. Notably, the school's former headmaster KK Dineshan testified in favor of the accused. Evidence revealed that despite the child's prolonged absence from school following the assault, her attendance was falsely marked.  The headmaster explained this was done to maintain her eligibility for the midday meal allowance. 

The case became highly politicised and BJP representatives alleged the complaint was fabricated as part of a conspiracy by the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI). The state government faced severe criticism over the repeated changes in investigation teams, with opposition parties including the Muslim League and Congress claiming collusion between authorities and the BJP to shield the accused. The prosecution emphasized that justice had been served appropriately on Children's Day. Defense lawyers announced plans to appeal to a higher court, claiming that DySP TK Ratnakumar had sabotaged the case.