Did EPS Criticize MK Stalin Over Credit Claim in Anna University Assault Case Verdict?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a fierce exchange of words, AIADMK leader Edappadi K. Palaniswami challenges Chief Minister M.K. Stalin's attempts to take credit for the judiciary's verdict in the Anna University assault case. With questions still looming, this case has sparked significant political debate in Tamil Nadu. Discover the implications of this ruling and its effect on public trust in the judicial system.
Key Takeaways
- AIADMK's Palaniswami welcomes swift conviction.
- Stalin criticized for attempting to claim credit.
- Unanswered questions regarding the case persist.
- Sentencing scheduled for June 2.
- Public confidence in the judicial system is crucial.
Chennai, May 28 (NationPress) The General Secretary of AIADMK and former Chief Minister Edappadi K. Palaniswami expressed his approval on Wednesday regarding the Mahila Court's prompt verdict convicting Gnanasekaran in the notable Anna University sexual assault case.
Nevertheless, he vehemently condemned Chief Minister M.K. Stalin for attempting to take credit for the judicial decision.
In a series of sharp social media posts, Palaniswami emphasized that the true credit for the conviction belongs to the judiciary and the Madras High Court, which had ordered the creation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) made up of female IPS officers to address this sensitive matter.
He accused Stalin of trying to politically benefit from the judicial outcome.
“Justice has been served not due to the DMK government, but in spite of it,” Palaniswami remarked, insisting that the judgment should not be exploited for political gain.
“The Chief Minister’s self-praise is unwarranted,” he stated.
The AIADMK leader also pointed out that many significant questions about the case remain unanswered. Primarily, he questioned why Gnanasekaran was released immediately after his initial arrest, only to be rearrested later.
“What happened between his release and second arrest?” he queried.
Palaniswami also demanded explanations as to why essential figures, including a Minister and the Deputy Mayor, were never interrogated during the investigation.
He expressed concern over the sudden withdrawal of DSP Raghavendra Ravi from the SIT, a decision that had raised suspicions at the time.
“Why did the officer resign in the middle of the investigation? What pressure was he experiencing?” he questioned.
Referring to the enigmatic phrase reportedly used by the accused during the crime — “Who’s that sir?” — Palaniswami stated that this crucial clue remains unclear.
“Who is that ‘sir’? The public deserves answers,” he asserted.
In the meantime, AIADMK senior leader and coordinator of the party’s Workers’ Rights Retrieval Committee, O. Panneerselvam, commended the Mahila Court for delivering justice within five months.
He noted that the rapid verdict has restored public faith in the judicial system and could deter crimes against women.
The Anna University sexual assault case, which occurred in December 2024, ignited widespread outrage and intense political discussion in Tamil Nadu.
The court is set to announce the sentencing for the convicted individual on June 2.
Point of View
It is essential to present the facts surrounding the Anna University assault case with neutrality. The ongoing political discourse illustrates the complexity of justice and accountability in such sensitive matters. Our commitment is to ensure that the voices of all parties are heard while emphasizing the judiciary's role in delivering justice.
NationPress
08/06/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the outcome of the Anna University assault case?
The Mahila Court swiftly convicted Gnanasekaran in connection with the high-profile Anna University sexual assault case.
Why did Edappadi K. Palaniswami criticize M.K. Stalin?
Palaniswami criticized Stalin for trying to take credit for the judiciary's actions regarding the conviction.
What remains unanswered in the case?
Palaniswami raised questions about the quick release and re-arrest of the convict and the lack of questioning for key figures in the investigation.
When is the sentencing for the convicted individual scheduled?
The court is set to announce the sentencing on June 2, following the conviction.
How has the public responded to the verdict?
The rapid verdict has rekindled public confidence in the judicial system, according to AIADMK leaders.
