The DMK, through its Treasurer and MP T.R. Baalu, has moved the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the Special Investigation Team probing the POCSO case against R. Veeramani, known as Gem Granites Veeramani, to summon Chief Minister Vijay and Ministers Aadhav Arjuna and C.T.R. Nirmal Kumar to give evidence, saying they publicly claimed to hold material about the party’s involvement but have not given it to the SIT.
Chennai: The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), represented by its Treasurer and MP T.R. Baalu, has moved the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the POCSO case against industrialist R. Veeramani, known as Gem Granites Veeramani, to summon Chief Minister Vijay and Ministers Aadhav Arjuna and C.T.R. Nirmal Kumar for giving evidence in the case.
No order on the petition has been reported. This report is based on media accounts of the petition, the contentions are those of the petitioner, and no response from the Chief Minister, the Ministers or the State has been reported. The case concerns allegations of sexual offences against minors, whose identities are protected and are not given here.
Background of the case
Veeramani and two aides were arrested by the Anti-Vice Squad on August 28 over alleged sexual assault of minor girls, and were lodged in Puzhal prison. According to the police, the case was registered after the Intelligence and Technology Police Unit received a USB drive containing video clips. It was registered under Sections 7, 8, 15(1) and 21(1) of the POCSO Act, Sections 354A, 354C, 201 and 120B of the IPC, and Sections 66E and 67B of the IT Act. The allegations are untested, and the accused are presumed innocent.
The SIT
On September 25, it was informed that an SIT had been set up to probe the case. It comprises P.C. Thenmozhi, Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Disha Mittal, Joint Commissioner of Police (Law and Order), J. Mutharasi, Superintendent of Police and Media Relations Officer in the office of the DGP, and V.V. Geethanjali, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Against Women and Children. Tamil Nadu Law Minister C.T.R. Nirmal Kumar informed that the SIT would work under the supervision of the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, who has been directed to provide the manpower and logistics.
On the same day, September 25, the High Court asked media houses not to publish videos connected with the case, remarking that uploading debates and photographs would deter other victims from coming forward and giving evidence.
The DMK’s petition
Baalu submitted that after the SIT was formed, the Chief Minister and the two Ministers made assertive public statements about the DMK’s involvement in the case and claimed to have material evidence of it. He argued that once an SIT is created, every person with knowledge of the subject has a duty to appear before it and produce all material evidence, and that the Commissioner of Police had also issued a public announcement asking anyone with information to furnish it.
He contended that making such claims publicly and not giving the material to the SIT would amount to concealment of material evidence, which is a criminal offence, and that when such statements have been made and the individuals have not appeared, the SIT has a duty to summon them and collect the material. He also submitted that if they hold any material connected with the case, its source has to be enquired into, including how they had access to investigation-related material that was not legitimately made available to them.
What the petition seeks
Baalu said the petition is not based on political disagreement but on the integrity of the ongoing criminal investigation. He said he had also sent a representation to the Additional Commissioner of Police, head of the SIT, CBCID, asking the agency to summon the individuals and secure all materials, documents, records and information in their possession. He has therefore asked the Court to direct the SIT to summon the Chief Minister and the two Ministers, collect the material in their possession, and ensure an effective investigation.
Why it matters
The petition asks the Court to test public statements by holders of office against the duty to assist an SIT, in a case where the investigation is already before the High Court in other proceedings. It is a request for directions and not a finding, and the Court will decide whether to entertain it, and whether the SIT should be asked to act, after hearing the State and the other respondents.
The claims by the Chief Minister and the Ministers about material in their possession are reported only through the petition, and their position has not been reported. The criminal case against the accused and any evidence in it remain to be tested at trial.
Case: Petition by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, through its Treasurer T.R. Baalu (case title and number not reported)
Court: Madras High Court
Date Reported: September 29, 2026
If you or a child you know needs help, CHILDLINE 1098 is the national helpline for children in distress. Report any content depicting child sexual abuse to the police or through the national cybercrime portal, and do not share it.