Chennai: A Chennai court has in an unusually swift judicial process convicted a 37-year-old man for the rape of an Anna University student and sentenced him to life without the possibility of remission within five months of the crime.
On 28 May, Mahila Court judge S. Rajalakshmi found M. Gnanasekaran, a biryani vendor, guilty of sexually assaulting the student on campus on 23 December, a case that became a flashpoint between Tamil Nadu’s ruling DMK and opposition parties. He was sentenced to life imprisonment on 2 June.
Police took just 162 days to complete the probe, file a charge sheet and secure a life sentence, a rare case of fast-track justice in a country where such cases drag on for years.
While the police submitted the charge sheet on 24 February this year, the Mahila Court fast-tracked the case and completed the trial in just 31 hearings between 7 March and 22 May.
The public prosecutor told ThePrint that strong forensic evidence and deposition of over 30 witnesses, including the survivor, ensured a quick conviction and punishment for the accused, who had a history of sexual crimes.
“We did not let even a single hearing go to waste in the process. Just 10 days into filing the charge sheet, we started framing of charges and the trial on 7 March. The scientific evidence was rock solid and the survivor deposed before the judge, which was more than enough for the case to reach conviction,” Public Prosecutor Mary Jayanthi told ThePrint.
An official, who was privy to the investigations, told ThePrint that the prompt investigation into the complaint and swift arrest of the suspect ensured the evidence was not tampered with.
“As soon as the complaint was filed on 24 December, a day after the incident, we first secured the CCTV footage around the location and secured all the suspects in and around the college campus. One of the suspects was Gnanasekaran, who was a biryani vendor close to the university campus,” the official told ThePrint.
The official added that the seizure of the suspect’s mobile phone helped conclusively establish the accused’s involvement in the crime.
“The mobile phone was seized soon after we confirmed him as the accused. Once the survivor confirmed his identity during the identification parade, we immediately sent the mobile to the forensic analysis, which proved him guilty,” the Greater Chennai City police official, who was initially investigating the case, told ThePrint.
Also Read: ‘Won’t be surprised if Prajwal is welcomed with garlands’ — 1 yr on, victims still hiding
Calling ‘Sir’ on the phone
On 23 December last year, the second-year engineering student was with her male friend when Gnanasekaran confronted them and threatened to share their videos with college authorities.
Later, he made the friend wait and took the girl to a secluded place, saying that her boyfriend was being investigated by university staff.
Gnanasekaran sexually assaulted the girl and videographed the act, later threatening to send the video to her father if she failed to meet him whenever he asked.
During the time, according to the first FIR, the student said that Gnanasekaran spoke to somebody over the phone, referring to them as ‘Sir’, which led to a political storm in the state.
The opposition AIADMK held huge protests accusing the ruling DMK government of trying to safeguard the ‘Sir’ involved in the case apart from the lone accused, Gnanasekaran.
However, while delivering the term of punishment for Gnanasekaran on 2 June, Judge Rajalakshmi said that no other person, except the accused, was either directly or indirectly involved in the crime.
“From the evidence of the survivor deposed before the court, her complaint and the scientific evidence available before this court, it is crystal clear that the convict threatened the victim to make her believe him as university staff. Accordingly, this court concludes that no other person is either directly or indirectly involved in this occurrence,” Judge Rajalakshmi said.
Meanwhile, on Tuesday, former BJP Tamil Nadu unit president K. Annamalai posted a video of himself on social media platform X, accusing the DMK of safeguarding the remaining accused in connection with the sexual assault case.
Armed with Gnanasekaran’s call records, Annamalai claimed that the accused spoke to a local police officer soon after coming out of the university on the day of the crime.
He also alleged that Gnanasekaran spoke to a local DMK functionary multiple times the next day on 24 December.
Forensic evidence helped convict Gnanasekaran
Greater Chennai City police, who investigated the case for the first three days, told ThePrint that Gnanasekaran’s modus operandi (MO) made it easy for them to zero in on him as one of the prime suspects, hours after receiving the complaint.
“There were 37 cases pending against Gnanasekaran, including sexual harassment cases. It was the MO that made us suspect him, and was later proved during the identification parade,” the assistant commissioner, who did not wish to be identified, told ThePrint.
“His MO was simple—to spot a couple in an isolated location and threaten them,” the official added.
The official also revealed that Gnanasekaran attempted to sexually harass another girl the previous day. However, he let her go as one of the college staff happened to see him with her.
“The girl, who escaped from being harassed by Gnanasekaran, the previous day on 22 December, confirmed the MO, but initially she could not identify him. Later, she confirmed his identity and deposed before the court, making the case stronger, without any loopholes,” the assistant commissioner told ThePrint.
After the identity of the survivor was revealed in the FIR uploaded in the CCTNS (Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems), the Madras High Court on 28 December formed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising three women IPS officers—Bhukya Sneha Priya, Ayman Jamal and S. Brind—all holding the rank of Superintendent of Police.
“It was the special team that managed to get the digital forensic report of the mobile phone belonging to Gnanasekaran. It was found that he had not made any calls between 6.29 pm and 8.52 pm on the day of the occurrence. It was also found that he had turned on airplane mode between 7.30 pm and 8.52 pm at the time of threatening the couple,” Mary Jayanthi told ThePrint.
A source, who was privy to the SIT investigation, confirmed that, according to the forensic report, the first message Gnanasekaran received that evening was at 8.52 pm, which was a missed call alert.
“It was also cross-checked with the network service provider, which confirmed that there were no incoming calls and outgoing calls from his number. The first message he received in the evening was at 8.52 pm, when he turned off the flight mode,” the source told ThePrint.
“Since he was a habitual offender, he seems to have turned on the flight mode when he entered the campus. But, it was revealed during the forensic analysis.”
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: Medanta technician arrested for rape of air hostess on ventilator support, say Gurugram cops