On the evening of December 23, a disturbing incident of sexual assault unfolded on the campus of Anna University, Tamil Nadu. A young woman, who had been in a romantic relationship with a fellow student for two years, met her boyfriend at a secluded spot within the university grounds. The quiet evening turned into a nightmare when two unidentified individuals confronted the couple, assaulted the boyfriend, and sexually harassed the woman.

Further details revealed that one of the individuals, later identified as Gnanasekaran, a 37-year-old with a history of criminal activities, was allegedly involved in the assault. The horrifying event triggered a wave of outrage over the lack of security on the prestigious university campus, sparking debates and political blame games over safety measures in educational institutions.

The survivor, a second-year engineering student, filed a police complaint on December 24, bringing the incident to light. The accused was arrested a day later, on December 25, after the survivor called a police helpline. The complaint disclosed shocking details: the accused had filmed intimate moments between the survivor and her boyfriend, using the footage to blackmail them. He threatened to leak the video and share it with her family and university authorities, compounding the trauma of the assault.

The Times of India reported that the survivor and her male friend were near an old building within the campus, close to Raj Bhavan and IIT Madras, at approximately 8 pm. This remote location, shrouded in isolation, provided an opportunity for the accused to commit his heinous crime. He first intimidated the survivor’s boyfriend, forcing him to flee the scene, and then proceeded to sexually assault the woman.

According to the survivor’s statement to the police, Gnanasekaran emerged from the shadows around 7:45 pm, having already captured private moments of the couple on his mobile phone. He used the footage to issue threats, claiming he would release the video unless his demands were met.

The survivor’s ordeal is chillingly detailed in the FIR she filed with the Kotturpuram police. “We begged him not to leak it. He then took my friend away while asking me to wait at the same place,” the FIR reads, highlighting the emotional and physical torment she endured. After intimidating her male friend into leaving, the accused, Gnanasekaran, coerced the survivor to follow him to a secluded spot about 200 metres away. Once there, he presented her with three options, none of which she agreed to. “When I remained silent, he got angry and began touching me,” her statement read, exposing the horrifying nature of the assault.

The situation escalated when the accused reportedly forced the survivor to undress, filming her without consent. This additional violation compounded the trauma she faced and further emphasized the malicious intent behind the crime. Despite the overwhelming fear, the survivor displayed courage by reporting the incident to the authorities. The incident has since sparked widespread outrage, with student organizations across Tamil Nadu demanding swift action and justice.

Before fleeing the scene, Gnanasekaran inflicted further psychological harm by demanding the survivor’s phone number. He threatened to summon her whenever he pleased and insisted she comply. To cement his control, he took photos of her ID card, obtained her father’s phone number, and reiterated his threats. He warned her that failure to comply would result in the release of her private videos, weaponizing her personal information to maintain dominance.

A particularly sinister detail emerged from her complaint. The survivor noted that while she was being held hostage, the accused received a phone call from someone he referred to as “sir.” According to the city police commissioner, Gnanasekaran made a deliberate show of putting his phone on airplane mode and pretending to receive calls. This act of psychological manipulation was intended to heighten her fear and confusion, showcasing his calculated approach to terrorizing the victim.

Prior Convictions and Assaults

Following the survivor's harrowing complaint, law enforcement authorities reviewed CCTV footage and identified Gnanasekaran as the primary suspect. Police investigations revealed that Gnanasekaran, who runs a roadside eatery—a biryani stall—near the campus, has a deeply troubling history. With over 15 prior cases of theft and robbery on his record, he is no stranger to criminal behavior. Disturbingly, his mobile phone also contained video recordings of at least five other women, further pointing to a pattern of predatory actions.

Adding to the revelations, a 2011 case showed that Gnanasekaran had previously been arrested for sexually assaulting another woman on the same Anna University campus. However, reports suggest that it remains unclear whether that case proceeded to trial, according to the Deccan Herald. This history raises serious questions about how an individual with such a record was allowed to operate unchecked near a university.

One critical factor aiding his access to the campus was his familiarity with the premises. Police confirmed that one of Gnanasekaran's three wives is employed as a contract sanitation worker at Anna University. This connection enabled him to move freely within the campus, evading suspicion while exploiting his knowledge of the area.

Amidst public outrage, another controversy emerged regarding the leak of the FIR in the case. Chennai Police Commissioner A Arun clarified that FIRs in such sensitive cases are typically restricted within the Crime and Criminal Tracking Networking System (CCTNS) to safeguard the survivor's identity. However, in this instance, the FIR was not blocked, raising concerns about procedural lapses. "Whoever possesses the FIR of the college student or circulates it to other groups of people will be tracked, and legal action initiated for revealing the identity of the victim," Arun stated, emphasizing the importance of maintaining confidentiality.

The police also reported a breakthrough in the investigation, stating that "the suspect has confessed to the crime," as confirmed by a senior officer to the Deccan Herald. Efforts are underway to strengthen the case, with samples collected from the crime scene and an intensive search for Gnanasekaran's mobile phone, which is believed to hold crucial evidence of his other crimes.

In response to the survivor’s report, authorities registered a case under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including charges of rape and sexual harassment. Investigators are working closely with Anna University's Internal Complaints Committee (ICC-POSH), which was the survivor's first point of contact for reporting the assault.

Anna University authorities and the Greater Chennai Police have jointly announced a comprehensive security review to identify and address potential lapses. This review aims to ensure that such incidents are not repeated, with additional safety measures expected to be implemented soon.

Despite the presence of over 400 CCTV cameras and advanced face-recognition attendance systems for staff, the university has faced criticism for not having stringent protocols to restrict the entry of outsiders. Adding to the administrative concerns is the fact that the university has been without a vice-chancellor since August, further exacerbating the perception of a lack of leadership in handling such issues.

However, University Registrar J Prakash dismissed allegations of security failures, maintaining that security personnel are always on duty across the sprawling 180-acre campus. He stated, "Surveillance cameras are also installed. Despite all that, this unfortunate incident has taken place. Additional security measures will be taken at the university level to ensure that such incidents do not repeat."

The police provided additional details about the incident, which occurred around 8 pm on December 23. The victim was chatting with her male friend in a remote area of the campus when Gnanasekaran approached the students, threatening them with a video he claimed to have recorded. After intimidating the male friend into leaving, the accused proceeded to assault the victim. A police officer told The Indian Express, "We have recovered his cellphone with evidence of the crime that he had recorded. We are now examining the device to find if there were more such crimes he committed and deleted evidence."

In response to the incident, student associations staged protests outside Anna University on Wednesday, demanding stronger protective measures for students living on campus. Protestors criticized the university administration for its failure to address long-standing security concerns, calling for immediate and substantial reforms.

The controversy surrounding the incident deepened with reports of the perpetrator’s alleged affiliation with the DMK party. Photographs have surfaced showing Gnanasekaran alongside prominent DMK leaders, including Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin and Minister M. Subramanian. These revelations have added a political dimension to the issue, intensifying public outrage and scrutiny over how the case is being handled.

Political Fallout

The shocking assault at Anna University has ignited a fierce political debate, with opposition parties lambasting the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government over what they describe as a failure to ensure campus security. All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) general secretary Edappadi K Palaniswami and Tamil Nadu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) chief K Annamalai have been vocal in their criticism. Both leaders accused the government of deteriorating law and order in the state, with Annamalai also sharing alleged photographs of the accused with DMK leaders, hinting at a possible political connection.

In response to the backlash, Tamil Nadu Higher Education Minister Govi Chezhian dismissed the allegations, accusing the opposition of politicizing the tragedy. He pointed to the 2019 Pollachi sexual assault case, which occurred during the AIADMK regime, to counter their claims. He assured the public, "Steps will be taken to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. Those who are trying to politicise the issue should not forget the Pollachi sexual assault cases."

Edappadi K Palaniswami did not hold back in his criticism of the DMK government, stating, "Chief Minister M K Stalin has pushed law and order in the state backwards. Whenever I pointed out the lapses in the law and order situation in Tamil Nadu, the state government was only keen on opposing my statements. Had it acted promptly, we could have avoided such incidents."

Adding to the charges, BJP state president K Annamalai remarked, "Tamil Nadu, under the DMK government, has become a breeding ground for unlawful activities and a haven for criminals. Women don’t feel safe in the state anymore, as the police are kept busy by the ruling administration to silence the Opposition." He further demanded that Chief Minister M K Stalin take accountability, stating, "The BJP Tamil Nadu demands that the Chief Minister take responsibility at least now, and address the people on the status of this sexual assault case in Anna University and do justice to the portfolio he holds."

Tamil Nadu Law Minister S Regupathi refuted the claims of political affiliation with the accused, clarifying that Gnanasekaran was "not even an ordinary party member" and emphasizing that his arrest occurred within five to six hours of the complaint being filed.

NCW Takes Suo Moto Cognizance

The National Commission for Women (NCW) has also intervened, taking suo moto cognizance of the incident. Chairperson Vijaya Rahatkar expressed deep concern over the attack, emphasizing the failure of the Tamil Nadu Police to act on Gnanasekaran’s previous offenses. "The NCW has taken suo moto cognizance of the disturbing sexual assault of a 19-year-old student from Anna University, Chennai. The NCW highlights that the accused is a habitual offender, with Tamil Nadu Police failing to act on previous cases. This negligence has emboldened him to commit such crimes, raising serious concerns about the collapsing law and order situation in Tamil Nadu," the NCW stated.

The NCW has issued directives to the Tamil Nadu DGP to ensure the survivor receives free medical care and protection, along with stricter legal action against the accused by adding Section 71 of the BNS, 2023, to the FIR. Furthermore, the commission demanded accountability from police officers involved in the case for their negligence, particularly for revealing the victim's identity publicly.