Only Governor, not government can grant sanction to conduct investigation against me in ₹100-crore fraud case, Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi claims before Madras High Court

Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi. | Photo Credit: S. Siva Saravanan Former Tamil Nadu School Education Minister Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi has contended before the Madras High Court that a First Information Report (FIR) registered against him by the Chennai Central Crime Branch (CCB) police, in the over ₹100 crore fraud case, was not sustainable since the sanction had been obtained from the State government and not the Governor.In his FIR quash plea, the former Minister contended only the Governor was the competent authority to grant sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 before the police could commence investigation into any alleged offence by a public servant in discharge of official functions or duties.Justice V. Lakshminarayanan on Monday (September 28, 2026) allowed an application filed by the Minister to dispense with the production of the original copy of the FIR registered against him so that the Registry could number the main case which seeks to quash the FIR on multiple grounds including the ground of sanction.In the petition filed through his counsel Richardson Wilson, Mr. Poyyamozhi said, the sanction that had been granted by the Public department by way of a government letter on June 23, 2026 should be considered as non est in law and incapable of sustaining the FIR as well as the subsequent investigation.Even otherwise, the FIR does not disclose any specific act of dishonest or fraudulent conduct attributable to the petitioner personally besides being vague and also vitiated by inordinate, unexplained delay of over four years from the date of the original complaint, he argued.“The haste in registering the FIR post regime change in the State of Tamil Nadu and a reading of the FIR would show that petitioner is being subjected to this biased investigation as a part of regime revenge, which ought not to be countenanced by this court,” the former Minister’s petition read.He also brought it to the notice of the High Court that the CCB had included the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by filing an FIR alteration report before a metropolitan magistrate’s court at Egmore on September 9, 2026. The alteration report claimed that material collected during the course of investigation disclosed the role of the present petitioner in relation to certain demands.However, the petitioner contended the alteration report does not state that any kind of illegal gratification was paid to him by any of the private school managements in the State for the purpose of upgrading their schools or obtaining permanent recognition and so on.“The alteration report does not speak about any overt act done by this petitioner, or any illegal gratification received by the petitioner. Thus, the sum and substance of the witness statements seem to be that some persons have allegedly collected money using this petitioner’s name,” he added. Published - September 29, 2026 12:08 am IST