CHENNAI: The Central Crime Branch (CCB) sleuths of the Greater Chennai Police have informed the Madras High Court that their investigation into the alleged Rs 100 crore school recognition scam uncovered the involvement of Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi, who served as the school education minister under the previous DMK government.
The submission was made by the police in a counter-affidavit filed through State Public Prosecutor R John Sathyan before Justice V Lakshminarayanan on Monday, when the former minister’s petition for quashing the FIR came up for hearing.
“During the course of investigation, materials emerged disclosing the role of the former minister Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi in relation to demands and representations concerning private schools, the collection of money by Arasakumar and Muthukumar by projecting their access, influence and connection with him, the corresponding facilitation and movement of those demands through the department and government machinery,” the counter-affidavit stated. The police affidavit also alleged possible collection of money under the garb of ‘party fund’.
‘No need to get guv’s nod to probe Anbil Mahesh’
The counter-affidavit added that the witnesses examined during the probe spoke about their direct interaction with the ex-minister and the discussions held in relation to the amounts collected from school managements, represented as ‘Party Fund’, as well as assurances concerning the issuance of government orders in respect of their demands, requiring a further line of investigation.
The police said upon the emergence of such material, the investigating agency, without bypassing any statutory safeguards, rightly sought prior approval under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The request was processed, and approval was granted under section 17A on September 7.
It said the applicable provision of law in the facts of the present case is only Section 17 A (b) of the Act, and the alteration report and probe regarding him were done only after the prior approval of the competent authority contemplated therein.
“There is no need, nor is there any statutory requirement to obtain prior approval from the governor, as section 17A(b) of the Act does not speak about prior approval from the authority who is competent to remove him from the office,” the police said.
‘When did DMK start speaking about powers of governor?’
Advocate Richardson, representing the ex-minister, reiterated the contention that the prior approval shall have to be obtained from the governor, who is the appointing authority and empowered also to remove the minister from office since the alleged offence was said to have been committed when Anbil Mahesh was serving as a minister. Referring to this, the judge quipped, “When from DMK started speaking about the powers of the governor?”
Indirectly referring to DMK’s stand on the necessity of having the office of governor, who it would compare with the beard of a goat, the judge said, “You (DMK) would speak only about beard and moustache.”
The judge adjourned the hearing to October 29.
