Palakkad double murder case: Convict Chenthamara gets death penalty
In the Palakkad double murder case in Kerala, Chenthamara was sentenced to death by hanging by the Additional District and Sessions Court-IV, Palakkad, on July 20, 2026. The court deemed the case a 'rarest of rare' situation, citing premeditation, lack of remorse, and threats against the victims' family. Chenthamara was previously convicted for the murder of Sudhakaran's wife, Sajitha, and had been on bail for that case. He allegedly returned to Pothundy while on bail and killed Sudhakaran and his 75-year-old mother, Lakshmi, after developing hostility toward Sudhakaran's family due to accusations of black magic. The court rejected defense arguments about his potential for reform and mental health issues, noting his justification of the killings and refusal to show remorse. The state will cover a ₹20 lakh fine intended for the victims' orphaned daughters.
The Additional District and Sessions Court-IV in Palakkad will announce its verdict on Thursday, July 16, 2026, regarding Chenthamara, the man convicted in the Pothundy twin murder case. Judge Kenneth George will deliver the sentence following the submission of a mitigation report by the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA). This report, prepared post-conviction, assists the court in determining the appropriate sentence by evaluating the convict's personal, social, and psychological circumstances, especially in cases where the death penalty is under consideration. Chenthamara, currently held at the District Jail, Malampuzha, will appear via video conferencing during the hearing. If sentenced, he is expected to be transferred to Viyyur Central Jail. On Wednesday, the prosecution formally requested the death penalty, asserting that the murders were premeditated and that Chenthamara continues to pose a threat to society. Public prosecutor M.J. Vijayakumar described Chenthamara as a habitual offender unlikely to be rehabilitated and argued that releasing him could lead to further serious crimes. The prosecution also highlighted ongoing threats from Chenthamara toward key witnesses, neighbors, and the victims' families, emphasizing the need for capital punishment for public safety. Defence counsel Jacob Mathew opposed the death penalty request, stating that the conviction was based solely on circumstantial evidence and lacked eyewitness accounts. He challenged the investigative process, suggesting that Chenthamara was treated as the primary suspect from the beginning. Citing rulings from the Bihar and Rajasthan High Courts, the defense maintained that the potential for reform should not be dismissed outright. During the proceedings, Chenthamara displayed no visible emotion and responded to questions with a statement expressing indifference to the outcome: “I have nothing to say. Hang me if you want. I am not Gandhi.” The case centers around the murders of Sudhakaran, aged 50, and his 75-year-old mother, Lakshmi, who were brutally attacked at their home in Boyan Colony, Pothundy, near Nenmara, in Palakkad on January 27, 2025. According to the investigation, Chenthamara harbored a belief that Sudhakaran's family was responsible for his wife and daughter abandoning him, and he was convinced they had used black magic against him. The prosecution obtained the conviction using testimonies from 81 witnesses and relying on 30 pieces of scientific evidence. Key evidence included statements from the accused threatening to eliminate Sudhakaran's family prior to the murders, testimony from a shopkeeper who sold the machete allegedly used in the attack, and depositions from his wife, Vilasini, neighbor Pushpa, and others. Chenthamara denied all allegations. Previously, Chenthamara had received two life sentences and a fine of ₹3.25 lakh from the same court for the murder of Sudhakaran’s wife, Sajitha, in 2019. After being released on bail, he went on to kill Sudhakaran and Lakshmi. Investigators noted that Chenthamara grew resentful of Sajitha’s family after an astrologer reportedly informed him that a 'long-haired woman' was behind the disintegration of his family. These three killings resulted in Sudhakaran and Sajitha’s two daughters becoming orphans. The case has drawn scrutiny toward law enforcement. Relatives of the victims claimed they had repeatedly alerted authorities about Chenthamara’s threats to harm Sudhakaran’s family while he was residing in Pothundy in breach of his bail conditions. They asserted that the police's failure to respond to these warnings played a role in the subsequent double murder. Sudhakaran’s daughters have publicly called for the death penalty, citing fears for their safety should Chenthamara be set free.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.
In the Pothundy twin murder case, Chenthamara, already convicted for the killings of Sudhakaran and his mother Lakshmi, faces a potential death penalty hearing. The prosecution argues that the murders were premeditated and that Chenthamara poses an ongoing threat to society due to his history of offenses and alleged threats against witnesses and victims' families. They presented 81 witness testimonies and 30 pieces of forensic evidence to support the conviction. The defense challenges the conviction, claiming it relies on circumstantial evidence and questioning the handling of the investigation. Chenthamara has shown no remorse and expressed indifference toward the outcome.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the prosecution's arguments for the death penalty and the defense's counterarguments regarding the reliance on circumstantial evidence. There is no overtly biased language or selective sourcing, and the framing remains neutral, focusing on legal procedures and the evidence.
Why factuality (85): The article provides factual information about the upcoming sentencing in the Pothundy twin murder case, including details about the prosecution's request for the death penalty, the role of the mitigation report, and the legal process. It accurately reports the names of individuals involved, the loc
Why objectivity (70): The article presents the arguments of both the prosecution and defense but maintains a somewhat neutral tone. However, it emphasizes the prosecution's stance more prominently, especially in describing the severity of the crime and the perceived danger posed by the defendant. This slight imbalance ma
In the Palakkad double murder case in Kerala, Chenthamara was sentenced to death by hanging by the Additional District and Sessions Court-IV, Palakkad, on July 20, 2026. The court deemed the case a 'rarest of rare' situation, citing premeditation, lack of remorse, and threats against the victims' family. Chenthamara was previously convicted for the murder of Sudhakaran's wife, Sajitha, and had been on bail for that case. He allegedly returned to Pothundy while on bail and killed Sudhakaran and his 75-year-old mother, Lakshmi, after developing hostility toward Sudhakaran's family due to accusations of black magic. The court rejected defense arguments about his potential for reform and mental health issues, noting his justification of the killings and refusal to show remorse. The state will cover a ₹20 lakh fine intended for the victims' orphaned daughters.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of the legal proceedings, including both prosecution and defense arguments. While the outcome is severe, the reporting does not overtly favor any political ideology. The focus remains on the judicial process and the facts of the case rather than ideological sl
A Kerala court has sentenced a 61-year-old man named Chenthamara to death for the murders of his neighbor Sudhakaran, 56, and Sudhakaran’s 74-year-old mother Lakshmi, which occurred on January 27, 2025. The court found him guilty after a sentencing hearing held last Tuesday, where both the prosecution and defense presented their arguments. The prosecution argued for the death penalty, stating the crime falls under the 'rarest of rare' category and citing Chenthamara’s lack of remorse and threatening remarks in court. The defense countered that the case relied on circumstantial evidence and claimed Chenthamara’s comments were related to self-defense. Chenthamara previously faced charges for the 2019 murder of Sudhakaran’s wife, Sajitha, and is now involved in three separate murder cases involving the same family.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the prosecution's and defense's arguments without overtly favoring either side. It includes direct quotes from both parties and provides background information on the defendant's prior criminal history. There is no evident bias in the language used or the selection of facts
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
India
