By Violet Li
A Cranbourne North child sex offender, who worked as a project officer for the Department of Training and Education, was sentenced to 10 years in jail after what the judge called “particularly abhorrent”, “simply horrific”, and “disturbing” offences.
Vishnu Palliyali Vikraman, 25, pleaded guilty to eight charges, including using carriage service to groom a person under 16 years old, using carriage service to transmit child abuse material and to cause child abuse material to be transmitted to himself, and possessing or controlling child abuse material obtained or accessed using a carriage service.
Judge Fiona Todd delivered the 10-year imprisonment sentence on Tuesday 18 February, at the Victorian County Court.
She said reading the 35-page prosecution opening summary was to experience a “relentless and profound revulsion and ultimately moral despair”.
“It is unbelievably bleak. The horrific nature of the content of the factual summary in your case presents a practical difficulty for the court,” she said.
The judge chose not to recite or even summarise the facts on the sentence but to quote the prosecution opening very selectively to reduce the exposure of court participants and the public to unnecessary harm and not to reproduce and transmit child abuse material in written form.
Vikraman was first arrested in December 2022 and was bailed on the same day. He reoffended during his bail, which led to his second arrest in March 2024.
The court discovered that he groomed a girl then aged between 13 and 15.
The offender was also found to have sent child abuse materials to other girls.
The police discovered that Vikraman had more than 3,800 images of child abuse materials across multiple devices.
“The content of the images is quite simply horrific,” Judge Todd said.
“Your transmission charges involve the exchange of child abuse material with some 29 people. The content is grossly depraved and violent.
“A large number of children were involved. Their images circulate with your help permanently and infinitely across the Internet, making an enduring and endless republication of these children’s horrifying abuse.”
While there was no evidence of monetary profit in the case, Judge Todd said Vikraman participated in the trade of child exploitation material in online spaces where his fellow offenders would send to and repay him with images and videos on a one-for-one basis.
She called Vikraman “a market participant in the child exploitation industry”.
Judge Todd said that to spend time with these facts was to stare into the abyss.
“If the most vulnerable and smallest children are the subject of violent adult sexual conduct, it is difficult to believe that anyone is safe anywhere,” she said.
The offender pleaded that he was lonely and felt inadequate to the task of forming an adult relationship, which Judge Todd believed fell well short of excusing or even explaining what he did.
“You were capable enough as an adult. You finished tertiary study, and you’d worked including in a government department,” she said.
“You were not raised in an environment that exposed you to or normalised deviant sexual behaviour. You grew up in a stable home, and you were living in an environment where the moral compass was set to north.”
The court revealed that Vikraman was born in India and raised in Singapore. The family emigrated to Australia when he was eight.
His childhood was characterised by harsh discipline, particularly in the context of academic performance. Vikraman’s father would physically discipline him on some occasions, and the two had a conflicted and detached relationship.
Vikraman achieved excellent academic results at school but struggled socially. He was said to have significant issues developing connections with his peers and was subject to bullying.
He completed a Bachelor of Commerce at the University of Melbourne. His mental health deteriorated during this period, and he was diagnosed with depression.
At the time of his first arrest, he was employed as a project officer at the Department of Training and Education.
No prior conviction history was found.
The expert witness opined that Vikraman developed “’paedophilic sexual arousal patterns”.
Judge Todd said the role for this sentence was to deter other people from engaging in this behavior.
“This sentence must communicate to anyone tempted to involve themselves in similar conduct…
“This sentence must also serve as a public denunciation of what you did on behalf of the community.”
Vikraman was sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment, including a non-parole period of six years and six months.
By Tuesday 18 February, he had already served 348 days of pre-sentence detention.
He will be registered as a sex offender for life.
