Jury Finds Pulmurugan Paulraj Not Guilty Of Alleged West Bay Road Rape

By Alric Lindsay

Today, July 29, 2026, a Grand Court jury found Pulmurugan Paulraj not guilty of rape, and Acting Justice Palmer discharged him.

The not‑guilty verdict was returned today after the jury retired to deliberate — bringing to a close a short trial in which the central question was never whether sexual intercourse had taken place, but whether it was consensual.

Paulraj had faced a single count of rape arising from an alleged incident in the back of a car on West Bay Road in December 2024. He denied the charge throughout.

Both the Crown and the defence had agreed that intercourse occurred. What the jury had to decide was whether the woman consented and, if she did not, whether Paulraj knew she was not consenting or was reckless as to whether she was.

Crown Counsel Kenneth Ferguson, of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, had told the jury that the prosecution needed to prove three things: that intercourse took place (which was not in dispute), that it happened without the woman’s consent, and that Mr Paulraj knew she was not consenting or was reckless as to whether she was. He had urged jurors not to judge the complainant against assumptions, telling them “there is no stereotypical rapist and there is no stereotypical victim.” He cautioned them against speculating about how much she had had to drink without scientific evidence.

Defence counsel Lee Halliday‑Davis had challenged the reliability of the complainant’s account, pointing to CCTV footage that she said showed the woman walking steadily and ahead of the defendant, and to what she described as inconsistencies in the woman’s evidence. She submitted that the Crown had not made the jury sure of Paulraj’s guilt.

After Acting Justice Palmer completed his summing‑up and directed the jury on the law, the panel retired to consider its decision and returned a verdict of not guilty. Acting Justice Palmer indicated to Paulraj that he was free to go.

The acquittal means Paulraj leaves the court without any finding of guilt. The complainant cannot be identified.