The Madras High Court, on Friday, December 27, came down heavily upon the Tamil Nadu police for mishandling the Anna University sexual harassment case, including the leak of sensitive details of the survivor and the Commissioner A Arun conducting the press meet. The court also appreciated the survivor for coming forward with her complaint and condemned any instance of moral policing inside the university citing this incident. A vacation bench of Justices SM Subramaniam and V Lakshminarayan took suo motu cognisance of the matter after an advocate - R Varalakshmi - wrote a letter to the court raising concerns on the law and order in the State.
The bench questioned the police’s conduct, asking, “The FIR was leaked from your hands. You should've filed an FIR in such a way that the information would not be leaked. Now who is responsible for the victim and her family?” to which the Advocate General PS Raman replied: “The accused.” The court retorted saying, “Not just him, the state is also responsible!”
The Advocate General, PS Raman, argued by stating that the accused had been apprehended within 24 hours of the complaint. “The accused was apprehended within 24 hrs. But instead of appreciating, they're asking for a CBI probe within 3 days,” he said, to which Justice Subramaniam asked, “Constitutionally, the state is supposed to prevent crime. How can you say the state must be appreciated just because one accused was apprehended?”
The bench also raised concerns about the press conference conducted by the Commissioner. “What are the service rules? Was prior permission taken before holding the press meet? ”, the bench questioned and pointed out the commissioner’s statement that there was only one accused. “Tomorrow if the IO finds there are more people involved, he'll be worried about bringing it forward.”
The court also came down upon Anna University for lapses in campus safety, pointing out that 56 security cameras were non-functional. “What are you doing? You are the guardians of these students. How are you ensuring their safety?,” the bench asked and directed the university to submit a report on measures taken to protect students.
The bench appreciated the survivor for coming forward and making the complaint. “Not just her, but all the people who have come forward… This person [accused] has been roaming around in the campus for around 10 years. Who knows what all has happened. We request all the girls to come forward and share their incidents. Otherwise, accused like these would be emboldened.”
The court also added, “No one should blame the girl for sitting with her boyfriend. It is her private right. The university or any person cannot say that girls cannot go out at night or talk to boys. This is their right… People cannot morally police the girl just because she was sitting with her boyfriend. That is why we stressed that we appreciate the girl for coming forward.”
The bench also said that there might be fear among other victims because of the FIR leak and said that there should be a system to make sure that the details are not leaked. “Even if the FIR is uploaded, the details should be masked,” the court observed and adjourned the hearing for December 28.
On the night of December 24, a woman student in Anna University was spending time with her boyfriend when she was sexually assaulted by a man, who was later identified as Gnanasekaran. He held the survivor in illegal custody for 40 minutes inside the college campus, filmed her with her boyfriend, threatened her, and then blackmailed her.
The same day, the woman and a professor from the university's POSH team filed a police complaint, leading to the registration of an FIR. He was arrested the next day, and soon after his arrest, allegations of him having links to Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam’s (DMK) emerged as several pictures of him with DMK functionaries were posted on social media. Meanwhile, the FIR of this case was uploaded on the Tamil Nadu police website and was widely circulated.