News Tamil Nadu

Anna University Sexual Assault Case: “CCTVs Not Working” Said DMK Min, “Phone Was On Airplane Mode” Said Police Commissioner, “CCTV Footage Shows Gnanasekaran Got Call” SIT Confirms

January 6, 2025
The Commune

In a new development in the Anna University on-campus sexual harassment case, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) has reportedly confirmed, through analysis of CCTV footage, that the accused, an alleged DMK functionary Gnanasekaran, had spoken to another individual. This revelation starkly contrasts the statements made by DMK Higher Education Minister Govi Chezhiyan and Chennai Corporation Commissioner Arun. In this regard, the SIT has recommended invoking the Goondas Act against the accused, Gnanasekaran, and the act has now been imposed on him.

The Anna University campus sexual harassment case, which has sparked widespread outrage in Tamil Nadu, involves Gnanasekaran, who has already been arrested. In her complaint, the victim revealed that during the assault, the accused spoke to a person on the phone and referred to them as “Sir,” although she didn’t know their identity. With Gnanasekaran being the only individual arrested so far, the person’s identity on the other end of the line remains a critical question. This has led to public demands for answers, with opposition parties asking, “Who is that Sir?” A Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been tasked with unravelling the mystery.

During their investigation, the SIT spoke to the victim, who reiterated that Gnanasekaran had made threats during the call, saying, “I will come after threatening her.” Authorities suspect the individual on the phone might be from Tiruppur and have a criminal background, leading them to plan an interrogation of this person in the coming days.

On 4 January 2025, the SIT conducted a raid at Gnanasekaran’s residence, recovering crucial documents and a laptop, which investigators suspect was used to upload pornographic material. During their investigation, the team identified four individuals, including women and students, who appear in some of the videos. Although many pornographic videos were found, only a few have been linked to identifiable victims. Authorities have assured that any victims who come forward will have their identities protected. This new development has added complexity to the case, prompting the SIT to broaden its inquiry into potential further illegal activities.

Notably, this confirmation by the SIT contradicts the statements made by the DMK minister and the Chennai Corporation police. Speaking to the press, DMK Higher Education Minister Govi Chezhiyan clarified, “The location where the incident occurred is a thicket not covered by CCTV cameras. What you mentioned—that there are no cameras at the spot where the incident happened is true. However, they are installed along the entry and exit paths, hostel, canteens, and main areas. While about 10% of the cameras might not have been functional, those will also be rectified.”

Chennai City Commissioner Arun stated, “As far as the investigation is concerned, he is the sole accused. There are claims that he addressed someone as ‘Sir’ at the time of the incident, but this is false—it did not happen. Specifically, during the occurrence, he had put his phone on ‘Airplane Mode,’ so this information is incorrect.”

In this context, when news reports surfaced about the SIT confirming the presence of CCTV footage showing the accused speaking to someone, the Tamil Nadu DGP dismissed it as false information. AIADMK Advocate Wing Secretary, I.S. Inbadurai, criticized the DGP’s remarks on social media, stating, “The DGP should not say that the #AnnaUniversityCase information released by the media yesterday is wrong! Even if it is wrong, only the SIT can deny it. Not the DGP! How did the DGP know the details of the investigation when the High Court had ordered that the investigation powers be given to only 3 women officers?” 

Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.