Special Court defers order on police custody plea against Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi

CHENNAI: The Chennai Special Court on Friday reserved its order till November 2 on the police plea seeking custody of former School Education Minister Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi for interrogation in an alleged Rs 100-crore private schools cheating case.

The former minister, who was arrested on October 26, 2026, in connection with a case involving the alleged cheating of private schools of over Rs 100 crore, has filed a bail petition, which is scheduled to be heard on November 2.

Meanwhile, the Central Crime Branch (CCB) had filed a petition seeking permission to take Poyyamozhi into police custody for five days for interrogation. The petition came up for hearing before The Special Court for trial of cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Special Judge L S Sathiyamurthy, on Friday. Poyyamozhi, who was lodged in Puzhal prison, was produced before the judge.

What did Anbil Mahesh's counsel tell the court?

Appearing for Anbil, senior counsel Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam submitted that his client had lost 2-4 kg due to improper food in prison. He said the police had already questioned him for eight hours on September 18, following searches at his properties on September 16, and that he had fully cooperated with the investigation.

The senior counsel also alleged that even the food directed by the court had not been provided to Poyyamozhi and that lights were kept switched on while he was sleeping. He pointed out that even Ajmal Kasab, who was arrested in connection with the Mumbai terror attacks, had been provided with all necessary facilities.

What did the prosecution tell the court?

The senior counsel submitted that school representatives had sought to extend the renewal period for recognition from three to 20 years, as frequent renewals created scope for corruption. The Minister had directed officials to examine the request, following which a GO was issued after consultations among various departments. He contended that the decision was now being portrayed as an act of corruption and that those who had sought the change were witnesses in the case, claiming that they had paid bribes.

Questioning why they had not been arrested, he asked whether there was any evidence to prove that Poyyamozhi had demanded or received money and why he alone was being prosecuted for a collective decision. The counsel further argued that Poyyamozhi and his family had worked hard for the welfare of the State and urged the authorities to treat him humanely by providing home-cooked food and medicines. He also sought a direction to the police to follow Supreme Court guidelines if custody was granted and assured full cooperation with the investigation.

Appearing for the police, Usha Rani submitted that appropriate medical facilities would be provided to Poyyamozhi in prison. As the request for home-cooked food required examination, she sought time to file a response to the plea.

Thereafter, the court adjourned the CCB’s petition seeking police custody of Poyyamozhi to November 2. The judge also directed that Poyyamozhi be produced before the court at 11 am on that day.