**Explosive Allegations Follow Sentencing in Anna University Assault Case**
A day after the Madras High Court sentenced Gnanasekaran to 30 years of rigorous imprisonment for his involvement in the Anna University sexual assault case, former BJP state president K Annamalai made serious allegations suggesting a broader cover-up involving senior police officials and a DMK minister. In a 15-minute video shared on social media, Annamalai demanded accountability from the DMK government regarding what he termed “possible destruction of evidence” and a “perfect sketch” aimed at shielding influential individuals.
Annamalai raised concerns about call records from Gnanasekaran’s phone, which he claimed indicate suspicious communication with police officers and party members shortly after the crime. He pointed out that Gnanasekaran’s first call, made at 8:53 PM on December 23, was to a police inspector. “Why did he contact the officer immediately after committing the crime?” Annamalai questioned, threatening to disclose the officer’s identity within 48 hours if the government failed to respond.
Further allegations included Gnanasekaran making six calls to Kottur Shanmugam, a senior DMK functionary, on the morning of December 24, just hours before his detention and subsequent release by the Kotturpuram Police. Annamalai questioned the circumstances of Gnanasekaran’s release, asking, “Was it to destroy video and phone evidence?” He also noted that Shanmugam called Tamil Nadu Health Minister Ma Subramanian shortly after Gnanasekaran’s release.
Additionally, Annamalai highlighted 13 phone conversations between Shanmugam and a university gate authority named Natarajan from December 23 to 25, questioning the nature of these discussions and why they were not investigated. He emphasized that one of the charges filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) includes the destruction of evidence, urging the government to clarify what evidence may have been tampered with.
Annamalai criticized the police for allegedly discouraging the survivor from filing an FIR, claiming they told her it would “ruin her life,” and for delaying the case registration by a full day. “The victim’s courage led to this verdict, but many questions remain,” he stated.
In response, Public Prosecutor Mary Jeyanthi affirmed that the verdict was based on substantial evidence, asserting that Gnanasekaran was the sole accused. She emphasized that forensic analysis confirmed the phone was in flight mode during the crime, and all evidence pointed to one individual, urging against any speculative claims.
**FAQ**
**What are the main allegations made by K Annamalai regarding the Anna University case?**
K Annamalai alleges a cover-up involving senior police officials and a DMK minister, citing suspicious phone communications and questioning the circumstances surrounding Gnanasekaran’s release after his arrest.
