Anna University sexual assault accused found guilty of 11 charges
The sentencing details will be pronounced on June 2; the case triggered widespread protests and raised critical questions about campus safety
In a significant ruling, the Mahila Court in Allikulam, Chennai, on Thursday (May 28), convicted 37-year-old Gnanasekaran, a roadside biryani vendor from Kotturpuram, of all charges in the Anna University sexual assault case.
Judge Rajalakshmi accepted the comprehensive report from the all-woman Special Investigation Team (SIT), finding the accused Gnanasekaran guilty under all 11 sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including rape, sexual harassment, and provisions of the Information Technology Act.
The court stated that the sentencing details will be pronounced on June 2, marking the conclusion of a swift yet meticulous judicial process.
Also Read: TN: Protests break out over sexual assault of Anna University student; 1 held
Student violated on campus
The case, which triggered widespread outrage across Tamil Nadu, pertains to the assault of a second-year engineering student on the Anna University campus on December 23, 2024.
According to the First Information Report (FIR), Gnanasekaran attacked the woman and her male friend and allegedly used a recorded video of the incident to intimidate, threaten, and blackmail the survivor.
A history-sheeter with over 20 prior criminal cases including including theft, kidnapping, and robbery, Gnanasekaran was arrested by the Chennai Police on December 25, 2024.
Also Read: Anna University assault | Accused DMK member or not? What CM Stalin says
Madras HC intervenes
The case triggered widespread protests and raised critical questions about campus safety across the state. Following public outcry, the Madras High Court ordered an SIT, led by IPS officers Bhukya Sneha Priya, Ayman Jamal, and S Brinda, to conduct a thorough probe.
The court also ordered Rs 25 lakh as interim compensation to the survivor, citing the unauthorised disclosure of her identity in the FIR — a violation of her right to privacy.
Also Read: Anna varsity case | Don't intimidate journalists: TTV Dhinakaran to police
Swift justice
The SIT submitted its charge sheet in February 2025, including critical evidence such as CCTV footage, the accused’s mobile phone data, and multiple witness testimonies, which played a decisive role in the trial.
Given the gravity and sensitivity of the case, it was transferred to the Mahila Court. The conviction, delivered within six months, has been praised by many as a model of judicial responsiveness in crimes against women, addressing public demand for swift justice.
Also Read: Safety audit in TN campuses: One-time stunt or major initiative?
Sentencing awaited
With the sentencing due on June 2, the case has come to symbolise the judiciary’s commitment to delivering timely justice for survivors of sexual violence.
The swift conviction is expected to set a powerful precedent, demonstrating that legal institutions can respond with both urgency and care in such cases.
EPS lauds verdict, slams DMK
Welcoming the verdict, AIADMK general secretary and the Leader of Opposition, Edappadi K Palaniswami, attributed it to the relentless efforts and protests by the party, which amplified the survivor’s voice in the public sphere.
However, he raised serious concerns about the Tamil Nadu government’s handling of the case under Chief Minister MK Stalin, alleging unanswered questions and potential cover-ups.
EPS questioned why Gnanasekaran, the sole accused, was initially released soon after his arrest and what transpired between his release and re-arrest.
He further demanded clarity on why a state minister and the Chennai Deputy Mayor, reportedly close to Gnanasekaran, were not investigated despite their alleged proximity to the accused.
The AIADMK chief also pointed to the resignation of DSP Raghavendra Ravi, a member of the Special Investigation Team (SIT), questioning whether it was linked to pressure from senior officials, as speculated in media reports.
Role of ‘influential figure’
The most pressing issue, according to EPS, is the unresolved question of “Who is that Sir?”—a reference to an alleged influential figure involved in the case, which he claims the Stalin government has failed to address. He criticised the Tamil Nadu Police for hastily declaring in a press meet that no one else was involved in the case, questioning the urgency and intent behind such statements. “Who are they trying to protect with this haste?” EPS asked, asserting that “half-justice” will not suffice.
EPS vowed that when AIADMK returns to power in 2026, the truth behind “Sir” and those shielding him will be exposed, and all culprits will face justice. “No matter who that ‘Sir’ is, they will be brought to the dock, along with those protecting them,” he said.
Verdict sends powerful message: TN BJP chief
Tamil Nadu BJP president Nainar Nagendran also expressed his appreciation for the judiciary’s decision, stating that it reinforces the rule of law and sends a powerful message that justice will prevail, regardless of the political affiliations or financial influence of the accused.
“This verdict is a beacon of hope and renewed confidence for women who have been victims of violence. It assures them that the law will uphold their rights and deliver justice,” he said in a statement.
Nagendran further emphasised that such landmark judgments will encourage women to come forward and report atrocities without fear, fostering a safer environment for them. He lauded the courage of the survivor, who, despite facing alleged intimidation from political quarters and even retaliation from the police, who are meant to protect, stood firm in her fight for justice.
