Published Sep 28, 2026 | 11:27 AM ⚊ Updated Sep 28, 2026 | 11:27 AM
DMK leader TR Baalu. (X)
Synopsis: Baalu said these allegations could be viewed in three ways: the allegations could be false and intended to defame the DMK and its leaders; the three individuals could possess important information or evidence related to the case but may not have provided it to the investigating officers; or they could have obtained information from the case diary through unauthorised means and disclosed it publicly.
DMK treasurer and Lok Sabha floor leader TR Baalu has urged the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the Gem Veeramani POCSO case to summon and question Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay and ministers Aadhav Arjuna and CTR Nirmal Kumar and obtain any evidence they may have regarding their allegations.
In a complaint submitted to the SIT, Baalu said the three had made public allegations that the DMK had protected Gem Veeramani and interfered with the case against him.
According to the complaint, Chief Minister Vijay alleged in public on September 25 that the DMK had protected Gem Veeramani. On the same day, Minister Aadhav Arjuna allegedly claimed that the DMK had not only protected Veeramani but had also improperly closed the case against him.
On September 26, Law Minister C.T.R. Nirmal Kumar allegedly accused the DMK of receiving ₹500 crore from Veeramani in exchange for protecting him.
Baalu said these allegations could be viewed in three ways: the allegations could be false and intended to defame the DMK and its leaders; the three individuals could possess important information or evidence related to the case but may not have provided it to the investigating officers; or they could have obtained information from the case diary through unauthorised means and disclosed it publicly.
The DMK leader said the allegations made by the Chief Minister and the two ministers are directly connected to the SIT investigation. He therefore urged the investigators to immediately obtain the documents, evidence and information forming the basis of their allegations.
The complaint also raises questions over whether the three possess evidence, why such evidence has not been handed over to investigators, whether confidential investigation documents were accessed without authorisation, and whether information from such documents was disclosed publicly.
Also Read: CPI(M) stages protest over Gem Veeramani case, demands court-monitored SIT
Baalu further said that, given that the case involves children as alleged victims, evidence must be collected immediately to prevent its destruction or concealment, adding that this would help maintain public confidence in the investigation.
He also urged the SIT to take action under the applicable provisions of the POCSO Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), if it is found that allegations were deliberately false, legally required information was withheld, or confidential investigation details were disclosed without authorisation.
The complaint states that the DMK’s position is that anyone involved in the case should face investigation regardless of their position, and that those making unsubstantiated allegations should also be questioned if their claims are relevant to the investigation.
Baalu has therefore called for Chief Minister Vijay and ministers Aadhav Arjuna and C.T.R. Nirmal Kumar to be summoned and questioned by the SIT.
In October 2025, a child welfare volunteer approached an inspector of the Anti-Vice Squad and handed over a pen drive. The volunteer said an unidentified person had delivered the storage device to his office.
According to the information given to the police, the unidentified person said the pen drive contained a video showing industrialist Veeramani allegedly committing a sexual offence against a minor girl in the bedroom of the house of his associate, Shanthi.
The police examined the video and found footage of an adult man allegedly committing a sexual offence against a minor girl. The Anti-Vice Squad of the Central Crime Branch, Greater Chennai Police, subsequently registered the case.
The initial investigation did not result in Veeramani’s arrest. In February 2026, the police submitted a report seeking to drop further action, citing “lack of evidence” and difficulties in establishing the identity and whereabouts of the minor girl involved.
The special POCSO court rejected the closure report in August and ordered a fresh investigation. The CCB subsequently arrested Veeramani, Shanthi and her husband, Mahendra Simhan, on 29 August.
The fresh investigation uncovered additional digital evidence and statements from other alleged survivors.
The police later arrested Ganesan, a former associate of Veeramani, alleging that he possessed a video involving a minor and had failed to inform the authorities.
(Edited by Sumavarsha, with inputs from Subash Chandra Bose)
