DMK MLA I Karunanithi’s son Anto Mathivanan and daughter-in-law Merlina have been on the run ever since an 18-year-old Dalit girl employed at their house made serious allegations against the couple, including that of physical assault and torture. Chennai police finally arrested the couple from Andhra Pradesh on Thursday, January 25.
The arrest came after the Madras High Court refused to direct the Principal District and Sessions Court in Chennai to consider their bail application on the same day of their surrender. The couple were booked under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
While disposing of the application filed by the couple, Justice N Anand Venkatesh observed that the usual direction to consider the bail application on the same day of surrender could not be given routinely in all cases because of the amendments made to the SC/ST Act in 2016.
Anu* (name changed) was 17 years old when she started to work as a house help at Anto’s residence to save money for her National Eligibility Entrance Test (NEET) coaching. According to her, she faced continuous harassment and assault by Merlina. Anu was even threatened not to reveal the abuse she had faced during her stay in the couple’s residence in Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai. The abuses she faced came to light when she was admitted to Ulundurpet Government Hospital in Kallakurichi after Anu's mother found cigarette burns, injuries, and contusions on her body and face.
Anu told TNM that in the last eight months, Merlina beat her, burnt her skin with cigarettes, and cut her hair short. Anu was not paid a salary for the last eight months.
Read: Dalit girl alleges assault by DMK MLA’s family in Chennai
According to Anu, the couple promised they would sponsor her tutorials and got her marksheets and Transfer Certificate. However, Anu was not enrolled in any institution.
Anu was not allowed to meet her mother. But, Anu’s mother was stubborn about meeting her daughter for Pongal, and urged the couple to bring her home. When Anu was being brought to Kallakurichi, she was threatened to sign a paper mentioning that she would work in the Thiruvanmiyur residence in the following three years to return the Rs 2 lakh that was paid by the couple for Anu’s education.
The First Information Report (FIR) filed by the Thiruvanmiyur police included sections from the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for criminal intimidation, voluntarily causing harm and relevant sections under the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. But sections under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act were omitted, despite Anu being 17 years old during the time of the assault. Activists told TNM that the FIR filed by the police was “weak” and even the sections mentioned under the POA were inadequate to describe the extent of the torture meted out to the girl.