Opposing the bail petitions, the police said in their counter that Veeramani had kept children at Shanthi’s house and sexually assaulted them.
| Photo Credit: JOTHI RAMALINGAM B
The Special Court for Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act cases on Tuesday reserved its orders on the bail petitions filed by Shanthi and her husband Mahendra Simhan, co-accused in the case filed against ‘Gem Granites’ proprietor R. Veeramani, 84, who was arrested on charges of sexually assaulting minor girls.
On August 29, the Immoral Trafficking Prevention Unit (ITPU), Greater Chennai Police arrested Veeramani and co-accused Shanthi, 60 and her husband Mahendra Simhan, 63 for abetting the crimes committed by Veeramani. The police stated that the accused had sexually assaulted several minor girls and that the victims’ statements had been recorded under the relevant provisions of law.
Opposing the bail petitions, the police said in their counter that Veeramani had kept children at Shanthi’s house and sexually assaulted them. Shanthi had allegedly attempted to destroy evidence and screen the offender. The police also alleged that she had access to bank accounts maintained by Veeramani and was involved in financial transactions. According to the counter, ₹24.63 crore was transferred from Veeramani’s bank account to Shanthi’s account. Subsequently, ₹2 crore was transferred from her account to an ICICI Bank account allegedly maintained by Mahendra Simhan. The prosecution alleged that the accused were involved in the offences and that the transactions indicated financial links among them.
The police said Shanthi and Mahendra had aided Veeramani in committing the offences. Electronic devices and other articles seized during the investigation were being examined to determine whether other minor girls were involved. “If the couple is released on bail, they may tamper with witnesses or evidence. The accused may abscond or evade the investigation,” the police said in the counter, seeking dismissal of the bail petitions.
The bail petitions came up for hearing before POCSO Special Court Judge S. Padma on Monday. Appearing for the petitioners, their counsel argued: “The petitioners were not properly arrested. An arrested person must be produced before a court within 24 hours. However, the police did not do so. The petitioners have already been taken into police custody and questioned. There is no further need to keep them in custody. Therefore, bail should be granted to both.”
Appearing for the police, the counsel strongly opposed the petitions, arguing: “The police can take the accused into custody and interrogate them as many times as required for up to 40 days from the date of arrest. The investigation is currently at an initial stage. Granting bail at this stage would affect the investigation. Therefore, bail should not be granted to the petitioners, and their petitions should be dismissed.”
After hearing arguments from all sides, the judge reserved orders on the bail petitions.
Published – September 29, 2026 09:20 pm IST
