The Veeramani case entered a new phase in Chennai on November 14 when a special investigation team searched and dug portions of the garden behind the accused man’s house in Royapettah, following a statement reportedly given by an arrested driver. The search was conducted to determine whether bodies had been buried on the property, but the supplied report does not confirm that any remains were found.
The action took place at the house on Lloyds Road after police arrested Bala, 32, described as another driver of Veeramani. According to the report, investigators questioned drivers already in police custody before arresting Bala. The report attributes the burial allegation to Bala’s statement during questioning.
Police subsequently examined sections of the garden on the property and continued searches in other areas. The report does not state whether the digging produced forensic evidence, human remains or other material linked to the investigation. Those findings, if any, would need to be established through an official police statement, forensic examination and the relevant court record.
The search is part of a wider investigation involving Granite Veeramani, 85, and seven other accused people. Police have registered seven cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and another case alleging abetment of suicide, according to the report. Veeramani, along with Shanti, 61, her husband Mahendra Simhan, 63, and three drivers, is among those arrested, the report said.
Investigators have already questioned arrested people in police custody and collected documents connected to the cases. Two days before the garden search, the special investigation team filed a 720-page chargesheet in a POCSO case before a special court. The report said the chargesheet named seven police officers, including former Chennai Police Commissioner Arun.
The investigation has also triggered administrative action within the police department. On November 13, Deputy Commissioners Geethanjali and Vanitha and Assistant Commissioner Rajalakshmi were moved to the waiting list after complaints alleged that they were connected to people involved in the Veeramani case. The supplied report does not provide the orders or the official reasons for those transfers.
The garden search places the handling of a private residential property within the formal requirements of a criminal investigation. Any excavation at such a site must be documented, preserved for forensic examination and connected to evidence that can be tested in court. A statement made during custody may guide investigators, but it does not by itself establish that a burial occurred or identify any person who may have been buried there.
That distinction is particularly important because the report describes the allegation as a claim made during questioning and uses conditional language about whether bodies were present. Neither the discovery of remains nor a confirmed link between the property and any missing person is established in the material supplied for this report.
The case also illustrates the expanding scope of the special investigation team’s work. Its inquiry now includes alleged sexual offences against minors, an alleged abetment-of-suicide case, documentary evidence, statements from arrested people and possible physical evidence from the accused’s property. Each element will require separate corroboration before it can support charges in court.
The immediate next step is for investigators to complete the search and disclose whether any material evidence was recovered. If remains or other relevant objects are found, forensic identification and chain-of-custody procedures would determine their evidentiary value. If nothing is recovered, the driver’s statement would still need to be assessed alongside the wider case record. The supplied report does not provide an official conclusion on the search.
