SIT to file POCSO chargesheet against Veeramani within 10 days, new complaint added
Synopsis
The SIT investigating the child sexual abuse case against Gem Granites founder R. Veeramani, 84, is days away from filing its chargesheet — and a second POCSO case, based on a fresh complaint, is now running parallel. Four accused remain in judicial custody as an all-woman SIT, formed just days ago, races to close both inquiries.
Key Takeaways
The SIT investigating the POCSO case against Gem Granites founder R.
Veeramani , 84 , is expected to file its chargesheet before the Special POCSO Court in Chennai within 10 days .
The original case was registered on 7 October 2025 after an NGO volunteer submitted a video to police; police had sought to close it in February 2026 but were overruled by the court.
A second POCSO case, based on a fresh complaint from a minor girl's mother, was registered on Monday; a separate chargesheet will follow.
Four accused — Veeramani , M.
Shanthi , Mahendra Simhan , and Ganesan — remain in judicial custody after arrests on 29 August 2026 .
Charges include POCSO Act sections, Section 67 of the IT Act, and provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act .
An all-woman SIT was constituted by DGP Mahesh Kumar Aggarwal on 24 September to handle the case and additional complaints.
The Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the child sexual abuse case against Gem Granites founder R. Veeramani, 84, is likely to file its chargesheet before the Special POCSO Court in Chennai within 10 days, according to police sources. The development comes approximately one month after Veeramani's arrest on 29 August 2026, following a court directive to continue the investigation.
State of the Investigation
Investigators are nearing completion of their inquiry into the first case, which was registered on 7 October 2025. A senior police official confirmed the team expected to submit the chargesheet 'within a week or 10 days' and was working to complete the process as quickly as possible. The original case was initiated after an NGO volunteer approached the Greater Chennai Police's Anti-Vice Squad with a pen drive containing a video purportedly showing Veeramani sexually assaulting a minor.
Separately, a second POCSO case was registered on Monday, based on a fresh complaint from the mother of a minor girl. Police sources indicated a separate chargesheet would follow in that case as well, with investigators expediting that inquiry concurrently.
How the Case Stayed Alive
The investigation had a significant procedural hurdle in February 2026, when police sought to close the original case, citing difficulties in identifying the minor seen in the video. The Special POCSO Court rejected that closure report and directed further investigation — a ruling that kept the case alive and ultimately led to the arrests. Notably, the SIT is also examining additional fresh complaints of sexual abuse of minors by Veeramani, suggesting the scope of the investigation may widen further.
The Accused and Charges
On 29 August, the Anti-Vice Squad of the Central Crime Branch arrested Veeramani, along with M. Shanthi, 60, and her husband Mahendra Simhan, 63, nearly 11 months after the initial case was registered. All three were booked under Sections 7, 8, 15(1) and 21(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. Investigators also invoked provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act after establishing that one of the survivors belonged to a Scheduled Caste community.
A fourth accused, Ganesan, 45, a former employee of Veeramani, was subsequently arrested for allegedly possessing the video and failing to report it. All four accused remain in judicial custody.
SIT Constitution and Oversight
Director General of Police Mahesh Kumar Aggarwal constituted an all-woman SIT on 24 September to investigate the original case and related matters, including the additional complaints reaching investigators. The formation of an all-woman team underscores the sensitivity of the case, involving child survivors and allegations under multiple protective statutes.
With the chargesheet filing imminent in the primary case and a parallel investigation underway, the next phase of court proceedings is expected to begin in the coming weeks.
Point of View
Only to be overruled by the Special POCSO Court. Without that judicial intervention, the case against an 84-year-old industrialist with significant economic standing may have quietly ended. The emergence of fresh complaints and the swift formation of an all-woman SIT suggest investigators are now under institutional pressure to demonstrate thoroughness. The invocation of SC/ST atrocities provisions adds a social justice dimension that will draw scrutiny beyond the immediate criminal proceedings. How fast the courts move, and whether additional survivors come forward, will determine whether this becomes a landmark accountability case or another that stalls in procedural delays.
NationPress
30 Sept 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Veeramani POCSO case?
The case involves allegations of child sexual abuse against R. Veeramani, 84, founder of Gem Granites. It was first registered on 7 October 2025 after an NGO volunteer provided the Greater Chennai Police's Anti-Vice Squad with a video purportedly showing the assault. An all-woman SIT was constituted on 24 September to investigate the case and related complaints.
When is the SIT expected to file the chargesheet?
Police sources indicate the SIT is likely to file the chargesheet before the Special POCSO Court within 10 days of 30 September 2026. A senior official confirmed the team is working to complete the process 'within a week or 10 days.'
Who has been arrested in connection with this case?
Four people have been arrested: Gem Granites founder R. Veeramani (84), M. Shanthi (60), her husband Mahendra Simhan (63), and former Veeramani employee Ganesan (45), who was arrested for allegedly possessing the video and failing to report it. All four remain in judicial custody.
Why did police initially try to close the case?
In February 2026, police sought to close the original case citing difficulties in identifying the minor seen in the video. The Special POCSO Court rejected that closure report and directed further investigation, which ultimately led to the arrests in August 2026.
What additional laws have been invoked in this case?
Beyond POCSO sections 7, 8, 15(1) and 21(1), investigators invoked Section 67 of the Information Technology Act and provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, after establishing that one of the survivors belongs to a Scheduled Caste community.
