The Madras High Court on Friday criticized the Tamil Nadu police for leaking the identity details of a 19-year-old student who was sexually assaulted on Anna University campus on December 23. The Court expressed concerns over the impact of such lapses on victims and their families, highlighting that it could deter others from approaching law enforcement.
A Vacation Bench comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Justice V. Lakshminarayan asked, “And who is responsible for the victim’s family and what they are going through?” The Court further noted, “The damage caused to the victim and her family can’t be taken back by you. Tell us by tomorrow morning.”
The hearing stemmed from multiple petitions regarding the ongoing investigation. Advocate Jayaprakash, a petitioner and member of the AIADMK, emphasized the trauma caused by the leak, saying, “Now everyone knows her phone number, her home. She and the parents are having to face so much.”
Concerns Over Police and University Lapses
The Court questioned the police’s handling of the case, particularly the Commissioner’s press conference, where it was stated that only one accused was involved. “How did the Commissioner hold a press conference and make a casual statement that only one accused is involved? Where are your service rules and what do they say about holding press conferences?”
Additionally, the Court raised concerns over allegations of custodial torture, asking, “Why did the accused have bandages on his hands and legs?” The State responded that the injuries occurred during an attempted escape.
The Bench also criticized Anna University for security lapses, noting that 56 of the 70 CCTV cameras on campus were non-functional. “Something happened inside your campus. Even the police required your permission to enter your campus, but a miscreant was allowed to roam freely,” the Court observed.
Call for Proactive Measures
Addressing broader societal issues, the Court identified drug abuse as a significant factor contributing to such crimes. “You (State) should do something about it too. Let us be proactive instead of defending such incidents,” it urged.
The Court also cautioned against victim-blaming or making regressive remarks on women’s freedoms in response to the incident. “No one should now start making absurd statements on women’s freedom and girls talking or moving around with boys,” it observed.
Case Background
The accused, a roadside biryani vendor named Gnanasekaran, was arrested within 24 hours of the crime. While the State defended its swift action, the Court stated, “Constitutionally, the State is duty-bound to prevent crimes. A crime happens, and the police arrest someone, and we are expected to appreciate it?”
Advocate GS Mani, representing another petitioner, alleged custodial torture of the accused, suggesting it might be an attempt to protect others involved. He also revealed that the accused has a criminal history with 20 cases and convictions in 16.
The hearing is set to continue on Saturday, with the State directed to explain the FIR leak and provide updates on the investigation.
Court’s Appeal to Students
Amidst the proceedings, the Bench appealed to students to come forward with information related to the case. “We want to request all students to come forward and tell us if they know anything more,” it urged, emphasizing the importance of community cooperation in achieving justice.
