When an engineer was murdered opposing his love marriage with a medical student in Chennai

The recent murder of Kavin Selvaganesh, a young engineer working at a leading Information Technology company in Chennai, by his girlfriend’s brother in Tirunelveli district has shaken Tamil Nadu. Since the victim belonged to the Scheduled Caste and his murderer hailed from the Most Backward Caste, the crime has reignited political calls for special legislation to tackle such hate crimes, often rooted in caste fanaticism.

It is, however, a misconception that such crimes occur only in remote villages or the southern districts of Tamil Nadu. Even urban areas like Chennai witness such brutal acts driven by caste or class prejudice.

One such chilling case was orchestrated in Chennai by a man employed as an Assistant Engineer with the Chennai Metrowater Board, 14 years ago.

On June 2, 2011, a 24-year-old engineer C. Parthasarathy left for his office in TIDEL Park, Taramani, after bidding goodbye to his 22-year-old wife, N. Saranya, at their home on Ayyan Mudali Street in Chintadripet. Saranya, then in her final year of MBBS, had met Parthasarathy through social media. The couple fell in love, formally registered their marriage on February 10, and held a religious ceremony 13 days later.

That day, however, Parthasarathy never reached his workplace. Saranya’s repeated calls went unanswered. Growing anxious, she approached the local police station and filed a missing person’s complaint. She suspected her family’s disapproval of the love marriage had something to do with his disappearance.

On June 4, passersby near a bridge at Ongur in Villupuram district — about 117 km from Chintadripet — discovered a partially burnt male body. The Villupuram Police, who received a call, arrived at the spot. They were unable to establish the man’s identity immediately as his face was burnt. However, upon sharing information with other police stations, they learned of a missing person case from Chintadripet. Parthasarathy’s father was brought in and he confirmed the body was his son’s.

Saranya was inconsolable. “I feared my family would harm my husband. But, the police did not take me seriously and just registered a missing person complaint. Had they acted on my fears, this could have been prevented,” she told journalists.

With this development, the investigation picked up pace. On June 11, Villupuram Superintendent of Police Xavier Dhanraj announced a breakthrough: the arrest of Saranya’s father, Narasimhan — a Chennai Metrowater Assistant Engineer — and four others. Those arrested included Saluja, a 35-year-old woman living in Villivakkam, Chennai, and three hirelings Janakiraman (25), Hemanthram (20) and Dhileep (25), also belonging to the same place.

According to the police, Saranya had left her family home in Perambur to marry Parthasarathy, defying her parents who had arranged her marriage to a doctor. She had since been living with Parthasarathy in Chintadripet while continuing her medical studies.

“The hired men tracked Parthasarathy’s movements for over two-and-a-half months. On June 2, when Parthasarathy was on his way to the railway station they bundled him into a car and went to Villupuram via Tindivanam. During the investigation, it came to light that all along the journey, they pressured Parthasarathy to end his relationship with Saranya but he refused. Having realised that no amount of persuasion will change the mind of Parthasarathy, they strangled him and set the face and other body parts on fire before dumping the body,” said Mr Dhanraj.

Police revealed that Saluja, a widow who helped Narasimhan plan the murder, had first met him at the Metrowater office while applying for a water pipeline connection for her house. They remained in contact, and when Narasimhan was distraught over his daughter’s elopement, she introduced him to Dileep.

Dileep, whose father and Saluja’s late husband had worked together, then arranged for the murder-for-hire team.

Saranya’s mother, Latha, was a schoolteacher. Since the key individuals in this case were all Chennai residents, caste dynamics did not dominate public discourse. The case was seen as merely parental opposition to a love marriage and, at the time, failed to attract political attention.