Asking ‘yaar antha sir?’ may lead to contempt of court: Govt pleader in Anna varsity case
FSL report confirmed Gnanasekaran's phone was in aeroplane mode; survivor also said she did not hear any ringtone, contradicting his claim of speaking to a "sir"
The Mahila Court in Chennai has sentenced Gnanasekaran, the sole accused in the Anna University sexual assault case, after convicting him of all 11 charges, including rape, following a thorough investigation by the Special Investigation Team (SIT).
Government Pleader Merry Jayanthi, addressing the media on Monday (June 2), stated that the court has accepted Gnanasekaran as the only accused in the case.
Also Read: Chennai court sentences Anna University sex assault convict to life term
No ‘sir’ involved
Jayanthi issued a stern warning that raising questions such as “Yaar Antha Sir?” (Who is that sir?) — a phrase that gained traction in political and public discourse — could amount to contempt of court.
She clarified that such remarks undermine the judicial process and the findings of the court.
The case pertains to an incident that occurred on December 23, 2024, around 8 pm, when Gnanasekaran, a resident of Kottur, allegedly assaulted a student on the Anna University campus.
According to court proceedings, the accused recorded the assault and threatened the student, claiming she needed to comply with “that sir” to resolve an issue.
However, investigations revealed no evidence of any other individual’s involvement, debunking the narrative of an unidentified “sir”.
Also Read: Anna University case: CM Stalin lauds police for swift action
Call records expose the truth
Jayanthi highlighted the forensic evidence that played a crucial role in the conviction.
The Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report confirmed that Gnanasekaran’s phone, registered with an Airtel number, was either switched off or in aeroplane mode at the time of the crime.
The nodal officer from Airtel provided call detail records showing that Gnanasekaran received a call at 6.29 pm and a missed call alert at 8.52 pm, with no activity recorded in between.
The survivor’s testimony also corroborated this, noting that she heard no ringtone or indication of a call during the incident, contradicting Gnanasekaran’s claim of speaking to a “sir”.
Also Read: Anna University case: Who formed SIT? EPS, Vijay slam ‘puppet CM’ Stalin
Wider conspiracy claims debunked
The government pleader further clarified that under Section 368 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the court holds the authority to name additional accused if evidence suggests their involvement.
However, in this case, the SIT’s investigation found no evidence of other perpetrators or abettors, thereby dismissing speculations of a wider conspiracy.
She reiterated that no external witnesses or additional suspects were identified, and that the court’s verdict was based on concrete evidence, including forensic analysis of Gnanasekaran’s social media accounts and call records.
Also Read: Anna University sexual assault accused found guilty of 11 charges
Report crimes fearlessly
Jayanthi praised the SIT for its “excellent and professional” investigation, urging victims of similar crimes to come forward and report incidents without hesitation.
The ruling has been hailed as a step towards justice for the survivor and a reinforcement of public trust in the judicial system.
The government pleader urged the public and media to respect the court’s decision and refrain from speculative narratives that could undermine the integrity of the judicial process.
