Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has made the R. Veeramani POCSO case a central issue in the Madurantakam election campaign, questioning former Chief Minister MK Stalin over why the matter was allegedly taken toward closure. Stalin has rejected the allegations and said his government did not order anyone to be protected.

Vijay raised the issue at an election meeting in Madurantakam, where he accused the previous DMK government of failing to disclose the full account of the case despite a complaint being registered during its tenure. He asked Stalin to explain why the case was not openly discussed and said the matter involved the alleged sexual exploitation of children.

The dispute comes before the Madurantakam Assembly bypoll scheduled for 6 October. The constituency became vacant after AIADMK MLA K. Maragatham Kumaravel resigned. Kumaravel later joined TVK, and the party has fielded him again from the seat.

What happened in the Veeramani case

The case was registered in 2025 after police received a pen drive containing an alleged video of the sexual exploitation of a minor. Police later sought closure of the case, but a special POCSO court rejected the closure report and ordered further investigation.

Veeramani and 2 associates were subsequently arrested. The investigation is also examining the role of officials involved in the earlier handling of the case.

Vijay alleged that the case concerned a person who had been damaging children's lives for years. He questioned why the previous government had not spoken openly about the alleged crime and its wider details. He also asked whether there had been an understanding between the DMK and AIADMK over the matter.

Political fight over alliances and credit

Vijay separately accused the DMK and AIADMK of developing an understanding despite their opposition to each other. He also claimed that political coordination existed among the DMK, AIADMK and BJP. He presented the Madurantakam contest as a direct fight between TVK and DMK and criticised AIADMK workers for accepting an agreement with a party once described as a “bad force” by MGR and Jayalalithaa.

He also objected to comments about women made by DMK leaders, saying such remarks would not be tolerated. Describing TVK as a new party, Vijay said, “Yes, we are children, but we are the children of Tamil Nadu.” He referred to a vote share of about 35% and said government belonged to the people and democracy.

Stalin said the Veeramani case should not be turned into a political issue. He described the allegations as false and defamatory and said action should be taken under the law against the accused and anyone who helped them. He also questioned the raising of the case during bypoll campaigning while referring to directions from the High Court.

Dispute over the investigation

Tamil Nadu Public Works and Sports Development Minister Aadhav Arjuna questioned how the FIR registered during Stalin's tenure reached the stage of a closure report. He raised the possibility of political or family pressure, although that possibility has not been confirmed. The DMK has denied allegations that it protected Veeramani.

CPM leader Shanmugam accused TVK of taking credit for the investigation. He said the proceedings moved forward after the court's order and stated that on 19 August, the state government had sought closure of the case before the POCSO court based on a police report.

Vijay ended his appeal by questioning the alleged proximity between the DMK and AIADMK and asking voters to support TVK's “whistle” election symbol.

Conclusion

The Veeramani POCSO case has become a major campaign issue in the Madurantakam bypoll. Vijay is demanding answers over the attempted closure of the case, while Stalin denies that anyone was protected. Further investigation and the court-directed process remain central to the dispute.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q. What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

It is a POCSO case involving R. Veeramani that was registered in 2025 after police received a pen drive containing an alleged video of the sexual exploitation of a minor.

Q. Why is Vijay questioning Stalin?

Vijay has questioned why the case allegedly moved toward closure and why the previous DMK government did not openly discuss the matter.

Q. What did the special POCSO court decide?

The court rejected the closure report and ordered further investigation.

Q. Who was arrested in the case?

R. Veeramani and 2 associates were arrested after the court ordered further investigation.

Q. When is the Madurantakam Assembly bypoll?

The bypoll is scheduled for 6 October.

Q. Why is the Madurantakam seat vacant?

The seat became vacant after AIADMK MLA K. Maragatham Kumaravel resigned.

Q. What is Stalin's response to the allegations?

Stalin said no order was issued to protect anyone and described the allegations as false and defamatory.

Q. What is the dispute over 19 August?

CPM leader Shanmugam said the state government sought closure of the case before the POCSO court on 19 August based on a police report.