The driver of former MLA Muthukumar surrendered before a special court in Chennai in a case involving allegations that private-school managements were promised permanent approval in return for payments, according to a report by Dinamalar. The report says Saravanan, 45, had been absconding and was remanded in judicial custody until November 25.
The case was registered by the Chennai Central Crime Branch after private-school administrators allegedly complained that up to ₹400 crore had been collected by promising permanent recognition or approval for their institutions. The allegations have not been established in court, and the supplied report does not include the First Information Report, remand order or a police charge sheet.
Dinamalar reported that former School Education Minister Anbil Mahesh had been named as the fifth accused and arrested in the case. It also said a special court had rejected his bail plea after finding prima facie grounds in the allegations. Mahesh’s counsel, senior advocate P. Wilson, subsequently approached the Madras High Court seeking urgent consideration of an appeal for bail, the report said.
The report further stated that Muthukumar surrendered two days after Mahesh’s arrest and that the High Court had earlier declined to grant Mahesh anticipatory bail while referring to Muthukumar’s alleged absence. Following Saravanan’s surrender, the report said, Mahesh’s bail application was again rejected while his co-accused remained unavailable to investigators.
The court has also been asked to permit the police to take Muthukumar into custody for five days for questioning. The report said the judge had deferred the order on that request. Police were quoted as saying that questioning Muthukumar and Saravanan could provide further information about the alleged collection of money and the process through which school approvals were said to have been promised. Those statements remain allegations attributed to the investigating agency.
The case has a direct governance dimension because permanent recognition for private schools involves regulatory decisions affecting school operators, students and families. If the allegations are substantiated, the matter would raise questions about how approval systems are accessed, how intermediaries operate and what safeguards exist around decisions taken by education authorities. The supplied report, however, does not establish whether any school received approval, how much money was allegedly paid by individual institutions or whether the claimed ₹400 crore represents a verified amount.
The report also said Mahesh had sought the quashing of a case related to the alleged collection of funds from private schools. The Madras High Court reportedly deferred that matter to November 30 after a request from his counsel. It further said the appeal against the bail rejection was being moved for urgent listing.
The supplied material contains a significant date inconsistency. Although the report is marked as published on November 11, it refers to an arrest on November 26, a hearing on November 30 and other events described as having occurred after that date. The exact dates, court orders, custody status and procedural developments should therefore be confirmed from court records and official police documents before publication as established fact.
