Following the denial of bail by the Special Court, Senior Advocate P Wilson, on Wednesday (November 11), made a mention before Justice V Lakshminarayanan of the Madras High Court, urging the court to hear Mahesh's bail plea. The court agreed to hear the case once it is numbered and brought before the court. It may be noted that on October 26, the court had dismissed his anticipatory bail plea, which led to his arrest on the same day. 

While dismissing his bail plea on November 10, Special Judge LS Sathiyamurthy said that the materials available on record would show Mahesh's prima facie involvement in the case. The judge held that being a Minister, Mahesh was responsible for the education and welfare of the students, teachers, parents and other stakeholders in school education.

“Therefore, every holder of public office is a trust and any deviations from the path of rectitude by any of such pubic servant is a gross and utter breach of public trust. The power conferred or bestoewd upon the petitioner, as a Minsiter of education made him a Trustee and responsible for the education and welfare of the students, teachers, parents and other invisible stakeholders of the school education. But the records and the materilas avilable on record would make a prima facie of the petitoner's involvement in the commission of crime, A1 and A2 acted as his aide, in the demand and collection of monies by false representation, threat and coercion and there are also materials to show that a huge sum reached him through his aides,” the court said.

The court also added that in such cases, the public interest is paramount than Mahesh's right to be enlarged on bail. Thus, considering the initial stage of investigation, custodial interrogation of co-accused, and that other accused were yet to be secured, the court opined that releasing Mahesh on bail would not be proper.

“Therefore, this court is of the view that the largest public interest is prime and paramount consideration in this bail plea, made by the petitioner. The welfare of the school children and their education prevails upon the petitioner's private interest and his right to be enlarged on bail. Further, the investigation is in the initial stage, other named accused persons are yet to be secured by the respondent. The process of custodial interrogation if any, of A2, a surrendered accused, has just started by an application presented before this court by the respondent. At this stage, it is not proper to release the petitioner on bail,” the court said.

It may be noted that Mahesh has been arrested in connection with an alleged 100 crore scam involving registration of private schools in the State of Tamil Nadu. He was arrested on October 26, 2026 shortly after the High Court had dismissed his anticipatory bail plea. Later, when a petition filed by Mahesh to quash the present FIR was taken up by the High Court, Mahesh's counsel had objected to the manner in which Mahesh was arrested from the advocate's office.

While seeking bail, Mahesh's side had argued that bail was the basic rule and jail was the exception. It was argued that mere apprehension of tampering with evidence could not be a ground to deny bail. It was also submitted that even before his arrest, Mahesh had cooperated with the investigation, appeared for enquiry, and a search was conducted in his office and residence. Thus, he had argued that he was entitled to bail.

The State opposed the plea and argued that the investigation was in the preliminary stage and Mahesh, being a politically influenced person, would tamper with the evidence and win over the witnesses if enlarged on bail. The state also argued that there were materials to show that the first and second accused in the case had collected money from people on false representation, and this money later reached Mahesh under the pretence of “party fund”.

The court agreed with the state and said that if Mahesh is released on bail at the early stage of investigation, it may cause further delay and the possibility of hampering with evidence. Thus, the court dismissed the plea.