What is the ‘Gem Granites’ Veeramani POCSO Act case all about? | Explained

The story so far: On August 29, 2026, the Greater Chennai Police arrested well known industrialist R. Veeramani (84), a pioneer in the granite business and founder of GEM Group of Companies, under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act on charges of sexually assaulting minor girls over a period of time. The police also arrested his suspected accomplices Shanthi (60) and her husband Mahendra Simhan (63) – the latter a senior employee of GEM Group. On October 1, 2026, the Greater Chennai Commissioner of Police Amalraj issued an order detaining the trio under the Goondas Act.

Who lodged the complaint, as per police records?

According to a police press note, on October 6, 2025, a volunteer of a Chennai-based NGO lodged a complaint with the Inspector of Police, Immoral Trafficking Prevention Unit (ITPU), Greater Chennai Police. The complainant said a man had visited her office and handed over a pen drive, claiming it contained video recordings of Veeramani sexually abusing a minor girl at Shanthi’s house in Chennai.

What did the police do?

On October 7, 2025, as per instructions of the Additional Commissioner of Police, Chennai Central Crime Branch (CCB), a case was registered under the POCSO Act by Gayathri, Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Chennai CCB. Two days later, the case was transferred to Yasmin, the ACP, ITPU, Chennai, on October 9 for further investigation.

Thereafter, the complainant’s statement was recorded before the Fourth Metropolitan Magistrate Court in Saidapet. Police claimed they were unable to identify the man, who had handed over the pen drive, as CCTVs were not operational in the vicinity of the NGO’s office. The police searched the bungalow but no evidence related to the case was found. The police said the recording in the pen drive revealed the alleged sexual abuse incident had taken place in 2019. When the DVR at the bungalow was inspected with the assistance of an authorised Cyber Expert, no foundational recordings of any kind were revealed. “Consequently, the copy of the evidence received along with the complaint could not be matched/verified,” it said.

Later, police summoned and questioned Veeramani and Shanthi. Veeramani claimed the man in the video was not him and he did not know the girl either. Shanthi said the location shown in the video was not a part of her house and she never allowed strangers into the home. The domestic helps in her house too endorsed this claim.

Police said a man, who runs a tyre puncture repair shop near the house, also told them outsiders were not allowed into the house. Besides, a staff of an eye hospital in the vicinity maintained the same.