Bhubaneswar, Oct. 31: The prime accused in the teacher burning case, Netranand Dandasena, who was a sub-inspector of schools, was today sent to judicial custody.

Police are now looking for his accomplice, who had poured kerosene on the victim and set her on fire.

Last evening, the police arrested Dandasena, who had been absconding for the past two months, from Ichhapuram in Shrikakulam district of Andhra Pradesh. Rayagada police had formed four teams to arrest the two accused.

The condition of the victim, 27-year-old Itishree Pradhan, who is a sikhya sahayak (education assistant) at Tikiri Project School, continues to be critical. She is being treated at a hospital in Visakhapatnam.

She had stated in her statement that the accused used to sexually harass her.

School and mass education minister Rabi Narayan Nanda yesterday sent a team of senior officers to keep a watch on the teacher’s health condition in the wake of chief minister Naveen Patnaik saying that the state government would bear the cost of Pradhan’s treatment.

“The expenses for her treatment would be borne from the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund,” Naveen had said.

Rayagada sub-divisional police officer Y. Jagannath Rao said the accused had revealed more details.

“He had molested the victim promising to arrange accommodation for her. After she lodged a police complaint, he pressurised her to withdraw it,” said Rao.

Though the police did not reveal anything about Dandasena’s absconding aide, sources said the cops had retrieved information on him from the arrested. Raids were on to nab him.

Dandasena has been booked on charges of sexual harassment and attempt to murder. Authorities have suspended district inspector of schools Dharanidhar Behera for not taking action against Dandasena despite being asked to do so.

The teacher had lodged a police complaint against Dandasena on July 18 and again on August 16. She had informed Padhi and the state commission for women about the issue on August 18.

Padhi had instructed the district inspector to take action against the sub-inspector after the sexual harassment cell had found him guilty. But, the district inspector did not take any action.