Latest news with #Gnanasekaran
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Business
- Indian Express
Ahead of 2026 election, how can DMK retain credibility and control the narrative?
The verdict in the Anna University sexual assault case — the Mahila Court sentenced 37-year-old biryani vendor Gnanasekaran to life imprisonment without remission for 30 years — marks a significant moment of judicial clarity. Examining forensic evidence, including mobile data that proved the accused had kept his phone on 'flight mode' for over two hours during the crime, the court dismissed speculation of multiple perpetrators. In fact, the judge found Gnanasekaran guilty under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Information Technology (IT) Act, and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act (1998) — a verdict arrived at without political interference or procedural delay. However, legal closure rarely halts political rumour. Even as the public prosecutor warned that continued speculation could amount to contempt of court, the phrase 'Yaar Andha Sir?' ('Who is that sir?') has already entered political discourse, largely due to insinuations by AIADMK leaders and an opportunistic digital echo chamber. The truth, it seems, is not what is proved in court but what sticks in public memory. Ironically, the DMK government, often accused of political micro-management, allowed this case to move swiftly through an autonomous legal process. In a state where past sexual assault cases, like the Pollachi scandal, were delayed or allegedly mishandled, notably under the AIADMK's watch, this is not insignificant. Nevertheless, the opposition has deftly turned the DMK's early assertion that there was only one accused into a point of political attack, calling it 'prejudgement' and 'potential cover-up'. This episode reveals the broader question facing the DMK as it heads toward the 2026 assembly elections: How does the party retain credibility and control the narrative? The DMK's record over the last four years is, in many ways, better than its predecessors. Schemes centred around school-going children, women, and the youth have received appreciation. Other schemes like Illam Thedi Kalvi, Makkalai Thedi Maruthuvam, and grievance redressal initiatives have improved state–citizen interaction, especially in rural Tamil Nadu. The government's efforts in resisting NEET, symbolically potent even if legally ineffective, have bolstered its pro-social justice image. Investments in government schools, Primary Health Centres (PHCs), and digital governance platforms also signal policy intent that is not merely rhetorical. However, the government's challenges are far from trivial. Tamil Nadu's graduate unemployment (16.78 per cent) remains uncomfortably high, and industrial job creation has failed to keep up with expectations. Chennai's chronic flooding and waste management failures have not seen systemic solutions, and the DMK's urban governance, while more responsive than before, lacks long-term vision. Add to this the unfolding TASMAC controversy, a potentially damaging scandal involving liquor procurement irregularities and alleged revenue manipulation. For many Tamil households, especially among the working poor, TASMAC is more than a public sector enterprise; it is a source of everyday distress. Women-led protests and growing anger around alcoholism have sharpened the moral critique of the government's alleged role in enabling addiction under the guise of revenue generation. Besides, actor-turned-politician Vijay's debut through Tamizhaga Vetri Kazhagam seems to have disrupted the Dravidian binary in a way few thought possible. Unlike fringe players like Seeman's NTK, Vijay carries an immense fan base and strong recall across age groups. His youth appeal and calculated distance from Hindutva politics make him formidable. Vijay has carefully crafted his messaging: anti-corruption, pro-education and socially inclusive. By not aligning with either Dravidian major or the BJP, he is attempting to occupy the unclaimed centre, a space attractive to urban, educated, and politically ambivalent first-time voters. If TVK contests all 234 seats, it may not win many outright, but it could split votes in enough constituencies to damage both DMK and AIADMK prospects. Meanwhile, the AIADMK is trying to regain lost ground under Edappadi K Palaniswami. While the party remains factionalised without a charismatic face, it still commands a sizeable rural base. Its attempts to link the Anna University case to a larger narrative of DMK complacency may not be grounded in evidence, but they are politically shrewd. In alliance with the BJP, the AIADMK hopes to capitalise on any anti-incumbency sentiment. However, this strategy remains fraught with risk: Tamil Nadu's electorate have consistently displayed a deep-rooted scepticism towards the BJP, viewing it as hostile to Tamil identity and interests, a perception that remains firmly embedded in the state's political consciousness. What must the DMK do, then? First, it must address the TASMAC issue head-on through transparency, audits, action against corruption, and a clear plan to reduce reliance on alcohol revenue. Second, the party must move beyond legacy rhetoric toward forward-looking governance. Digital skills training, green jobs, women's safety, and urban renewal should define its new language of social justice. Most crucially, it must seize control of the narrative. Though legally closed, the Anna University case remains a battle of perception. If the DMK stays reactive, allowing its record to be drowned out by slogans and suspicion, it risks ceding the larger electoral script. In Tamil Nadu, politically sharp and emotionally engaged voters expect more than performance; they demand trust, which is earned constantly. The DMK seems to have a strong chance in 2026. Stalin remains a credible leader, and the party's organisation is solid. But election results depend not just on incumbency or ideology but on timing, tone, and trust. The path to Fort St. George lies as much through governance as through the people's imagination. And in that realm, the verdict is never final. It is constantly being rewritten, tweet by tweet, poster by poster, speech by speech. The court may have ruled on Gnanasekaran. But in the court of public opinion, the DMK must still argue its case every single day, until the ballot speaks. The writer is an education consultant and political analyst based in Bengaluru
New Indian Express
a day ago
- New Indian Express
Kamal Haasan welcomes verdict in Anna University sexual assault case
CHENNAI: Actor Kamal Haasan extended his support to the verdict given by the Special Court for Women in the Anna University sexual assault case. Taking to his official handle of X, he wrote, "I wholeheartedly welcome the verdict of the Special Court for Women, which has sentenced the accused in the Anna University student rape case to 30 years of life imprisonment without parole. Any act against women can never be tolerated or condoned. This verdict has confirmed the hope that such crimes will be met with fearsome punishment." Earlier today, a Chennai Mahila court awarded a life sentence for a minimum period of 30 years without remission and a fine of Rs 90,000 to the accused Gnanasekaran, who has been convicted of sexually harassing a student on the Anna University campus in December last year. Mahila Court judge M Rajalakshmi, who convicted Gnanasekaran on May 28, awarded sentences in respect of each of the 11 charges proved by the prosecution against him.
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Anna University sexual assault convict jailed for 30 years
A local court in Chennai on Monday sentenced a 37-year-old man, convicted for sexually assaulting a 19-year-old student of Anna University last year, to 30 years in prison without remission. Mahila court judge M Rajalakshmi pronounced the sentence in respect of each of the 11 charges proved by the prosecution and said the sentences will run concurrently. 'He will not be entitled to any privileges or early release,' public prosecutor Mary Jeyanthi told reporters after the verdict. 'His phone is the weapon of this case,' Jeyanthi said. 'We submitted to the court a report from the forensic science lab which had analysed his phone activities on the day of the crime and concluded that he put his phone on flight mode. An official from his network provider testified in court that he received no calls post 6.29pm on December 23 until he received an SMS at 8.58pm clearly stating his phone was in airplane mode during this time.' Earlier on Wednesday, she convicted Gnanasekaran finding him guilty of charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Information Technology Act, and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. In December 2024, Gnanasekaran, who worked as a vendor near the university, broke into the campus and assaulted the student. The First Information Report in the case said that Gnanasekaran forced the student to perform 'sexual acts'. The student told police that Gnanasekaran emerged from behind after having recorded a video of her with her friend on his mobile phone. He threatened to leak the video and send it to her father and the college authorities. Gnanasekaran threatened and first physically assaulted the student's friend, a third-year student. The student urged Gnanasekaran not to leak the video. Gnanasekaran took her friend away, asking her to wait at the same place. He then took the 19-year-old to a secluded spot about 200 metres away and sexually assaulted her. Gnanasekaran also took photos of her ID card and father's number and asked her to keep meeting him, failing which he said he would release her videos. Gnanasekaran was arrested on December 24 last year. However, the FIR of the case was downloaded from the CCTNS website of Tamil Nadu police and broadcast by certain sections of the media which created a furore. Later, the Madras high court transferred the investigation of the case to a special investigation team, which also probed the FIR leak. The SIT filed a charge sheet in February before a magistrate court. Thereafter, the case was transferred to the Mahila Court. The judge, while convicting Gnanasekaran, said that he sought a lenient sentence claiming he was the sole bread-winner of the family and prosecution objected to it and sought maximum punishment. The ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), which was under fire over Gnanasekaran's alleged links with it, hailed the speedy verdict within five months, saying it showed the government's commitment to protecting women. DMK leader RS Bharathi said Gnanasekaran was arrested within 24 hours after the crime was reported, a charge sheet was filed within 60 days on February 24 and the police gathered strong evidence and the court found the accused guilty within five months. He said the government will not tolerate crimes against women. Opposition All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) leader Edappadi Palaniswami said its state-wide protests led to the speedy conviction in the case. He added that some important questions remained unanswered and vowed to ensure that others involved in the crime were also punished. The AIADMK campaigned for justice in the case, asking: 'Who is that, Sir?' In her complaint to the police, the student said that Gnanasekaran spoke to someone over the phone, addressing him as 'sir' and pretending to take instructions from him. Chennai police chief, A Arun, clarified that Gnanasekaran had put his phone on airplane mode and pretended to speak to someone, referring to him as 'sir' to intimidate the student. He said there was no other suspect in the case. The AIADMK continued the 'sir campaign' and brought placards to the state assembly asking: 'Who is that, sir?' The AIADMK maintained Gnanasekaran was linked with the DMK, citing his photos posing with DMK ministers. Chief minister MK Stalin clarified that Gnanasekaran was a DMK supporter but not a member and promised justice in the case. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader K Annamalai, who whipped himself six times to protest against the assault, accused the Tamil Nadu police of leaking the student's identity. He released pictures of the accused posing with deputy chief minister Udhayanidhi Stalin and minister M Subramanian. He called Gnanasekaran a repeat offender and a DMK functionary. The DMK denied the claim, saying anyone can click a picture with government functionaries. AIADMK and BJP workers, including former Telangana governor Tamilisai Soundararajan, protested outside the campus and district collectorates. The assault forced Anna University to deploy more security personnel and CCTVs on campus to strengthen security. The police and the university also conducted a joint security audit. The Madras high court took a suo motu cognisance of the case and directed the state government to pay ₹25 lakh compensation to the 19-year-old student and Anna University to sponsor her education for failing to ensure her safety. It also appointed an all-women Special Investigation Team to probe the assault.
New Indian Express
2 days ago
- New Indian Express
Anna University rape convict gets 30-year jail, no remission
CHENNAI: The convict in the sensational Anna University sexual assault case, A Gnanasekaran (37), was sentenced to life imprisonment for a minimum period of 30 years without any remission of the jail term by the Chennai Mahila Court on Monday. Judge M Rajalakshmi said the perpetrator of such a grave offence cannot be shown any leniency. Gnanasekaran, a biryani stall owner, had raped the second-year engineering student on the Anna University campus on December 23, 2024, claiming himself to be a university staff member and had videographed the act. A total fine of Rs 90,000 was slapped on the convict, and the judge ordered the amount to be paid to the survivor. The court also ruled out the involvement of any other accused, widely attributed as 'sir.' The court announced the quantum of punishment on Monday four days after holding the accused guilty on all 11 counts of charges, including rape. 'The convict is sentenced to life imprisonment for a minimum period of 30 years without remission with a fine of Rs 25,000 under section 64 (1) (rape) of the BNS. In default, he has to undergo simple imprisonment for three months,' the judge said in her 207-page order. Pointing out that 37 other criminal cases were pending against Gnanasekaran, the judge said 'no leniency' could be shown to such an offender. The other charges he was punished with imprisonment are 329, 126 (2), 76, 127 (2), 75 (2), 76, 351 (3), 238 (b) of BNS and BNSS and Section 66 E of Information Technology Act for criminal trespass, wrongful restraint, using criminal force to disrobe a woman, and videographing a woman by violating her privacy.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Cases beyond media glare remain stuck for years
It took 162 days for the lone suspect in the case to be convicted. The incident happened on Dec 23 and was reported the next day. In Feb a special investigation team formed by Madras HC laid the chargesheet, and on Monday, Gnanasekaran got life term. While appreciating the swift conviction in the case, jurists and activists point out that several thousands of other victims — especially in so-called non-sensational cases — are left waiting indefinitely for justice. More than 46,000 criminal cases in Chennai remained unresolved as of 2023, and many involved serious offences such as murder, cheating, and robbery. Of these, 6,000 cases were idling for more than a decade, with no chargesheet filed. A chargesheet marks end of police probe and beginning of trial in court. "Only high-profile cases with media glare move fast. What about those in rural or under-reported areas without that visibility," asked social activist R Viswanath. He said justice should be uniformly accessible for all. Key reasons for the backlog include the absence of a unit dedicated to monitoring investigation progress, delays in forensic and postmortem reports, and frequent transfers of investigating officers. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Encontre voos low-cost Voos | Anúncios de Pesquisa Saiba Mais Undo Without timely chargesheets, courts cannot initiate hearings. The delays also risk suspects walking free. Under Section 167 of the CrPC, those in custody must be released on bail if chargesheets aren't filed within 60 or 90 days, depending on the offence. "This loophole lets accused misuse bail to tamper with evidence," said advocate R Chandar. Senior police officials admit that investigating officers—usually from law-and-order units — are overburdened and lack time for proper probe and documentation. Though zones such as North and West Chennai introduced colour-coded alerts to track deadlines and fixed tenures for officers, these are piecemeal solutions. A comprehensive, state-wide policy is needed to streamline case tracking, officer accountability, and forensic coordination—ensuring the justice system works for all, not just the headline cases, say experts.
