The Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the sexual assault of a minor has arrested a woman police inspector and an AIADMK ward secretary on allegations of misconduct in handling the case. The arrests, announced on 7 January 2025, highlight ongoing concerns over the investigation’s integrity.
The Greater Chennai Police (GCP) had earlier detained two others, including a relative of the victim, in connection with the case. The arrested inspector has been identified as Raji, while the AIADMK functionary was named Sudhakar. Authorities have yet to reveal the legal sections under which the duo was charged.
Inspector Raji has been accused of mishandling the investigation and allegedly assaulting the victim’s family. Sudhakar is said to have acted in favor of the main accused, Sathish, a 31-year-old water can supplier and neighbor of the victim, by misleading the inquiry.
Background And High Court’s Findings
The disturbing case centers on the brutal sexual assault of a 10-year-old girl in Chennai, which remained hidden for almost a week before coming to light on 29 August 2024. The incident was revealed when the child’s mother, a cook by profession, sought medical attention for her daughter, who was suffering from severe stomach pain. At Kilpauk Medical College, doctors discovered signs of repeated sexual assault, triggering the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) at the Anna Nagar all-women police station on 30 August 2024. The police named a 31-year-old water delivery man, Satish, as the primary suspect in the case.
Despite the gravity of the crime, there were serious delays and lapses in the police investigation. The accused, Satish, was not arrested until 12 days later after media reports brought attention to the case. This delay fueled allegations that the authorities were attempting to downplay the case and avoid public scrutiny. In the wake of these accusations, the victim’s mother came forward with shocking claims that she had been mistreated by the police during the investigation, including allegations of physical assault by a police inspector named Raji.
The Madras High Court, on 10 September 2024, took suo motu cognizance of a case involving the repeated sexual assault of a 10-year-old girl in Tamil Nadu, following allegations of police misconduct and procedural violations. The victim’s mother claimed police assaulted her and that her daughter’s statement was recorded improperly, breaching POCSO Act guidelines. The court criticized the police for targeting YouTuber Maridhas and journalist A. Selvaraj with FIRs over leaked case details, instead of investigating the source of the leak, calling it an attack on press freedom.
On 1 October 2024, the Madras High Court had ordered a CBI probe, citing delays and police harassment of the survivor’s family. Despite the severity of the crime, which involved repeated sexual assault of the minor, the primary suspect was arrested 12 days after the incident. The court condemned police procedural violations in handling the victim’s statement, noting breaches of the POCSO Act. The child was interrogated late at night in a hospital without her mother, and no trauma-informed forensic interview was conducted, risking the integrity of her testimony by failing to ensure a child-friendly environment.
The victim’s mother subsequently filed a habeas corpus petition in the Madras High Court, which condemned the audio leak and ordered the case to be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The Supreme Court on 18 November 2024, formed a three-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the sexual assault of a 10-year-old girl in Chennai’s Anna Nagar on 29 September 2024. The SIT, led by DIG Saroj Kumar Thakur and two senior women IPS officers, replaces a Madras High Court order transferring the case to the CBI, a move contested by Tamil Nadu. The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphasized the need for a timely probe, directing weekly progress reports to the High Court.
Tamil Nadu’s DGP was instructed to partially relieve SIT members of other duties. The court also ordered ₹75,000 compensation for the survivor’s mother for litigation expenses. Addressing political exploitation concerns, the bench urged restraint but refrained from making binding comments. The Chief Justice of the Madras High Court was asked to monitor the SIT’s progress.
(With inputs from The New Indian Express)
Subscribe to our Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram channels and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.