When the matter came up before Justice V Lakshminarayanan, the court directed the State to respond to the plea and adjourned the hearing by a week.

The FIR was registered based on a complaint by the former General Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools Association, alleging that the President of the Association, BT Arasukumar, and other office bearers had collected membership and subscription fees from private schools on the promise of securing NOCs, licenses, recognition and renewals and did not fulfil the promise. The FIR was initially registered for offences under Sections 316(5) and 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS.

Later, the prosecution filed an alteration report before the Metropolitan Magistrate to include offences under Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and to array Mahesh as an accused. Following this, the case was registered against him. Mahesh now approached the court seeking to quash the FIR.

Mahesh submitted that there was no record to show that illegal gratification was received by him and no overt act had been done by him.

He argued that after the elections and change in government, the de facto complainant seemed to have some misgivings with the Association president and had lodged the complaint. He pointed out that even as per the complaint and statement of witnesses, it could be seen that some persons had collected money from private schools using Mahesh's name and no overt act had been done by him.

Mahesh also submitted that prior approval as required under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act had been obtained by the Secretary to the Government and not the Governor. It was submitted that at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed, Mahesh was a Minister in the State, and as such the authority to remove him from the post was the Governor.

Mahesh also pointed out that even after filing the alteration report, the investigation in the case was retained by the Crime Branch, when it should have been handed over to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, which was the sole investigating body authorised to investigate Prevention of Corruption cases in the State of Tamil Nadu. It was thus argued that the investigating agency was acting under extraneous considerations.

When the matter came up for hearing today, Senior Advocate P Wilson, assisted by Advocate Richardson Wilson, argued submitted that the investigating agency had raises Mahesh's house on September 16 and he was asked to appear for investigation on September 18. He added that on September 18, Mahesh was interrogated for almost 8 hours.

Wilson also submitted that the prior approval granted by the Secretary to the Government was not valid under law, as only the Governor could have granted such prior approval. He also pointed out that the court was already seized of a similar matter with respect to the grant of prior approval (in EV Velu's case) and the present case would be directly covered by the same.

Considering the submission, the court directed the State to file its counter and adjourned the case.

Case Title: Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi v The State of Tamil Nadu

Case No: Crl OP 28363 of 2026