Decoding Maharashtra’s controversial ‘Urban Maoism’ bill
The bill targets ‘unlawful activities of left-wing extremist organisations’
Mumbai: The Maharashtra assembly on Thursday passed the stringent Maharashtra Special Public Security (MSPS) Bill by a voice vote. The Bill aims “to provide for effective prevention of certain unlawful activities of left wing extremist organisations or similar organisations.” reported the Indian Express.
The Maharashtra State Public Security (MSPS) Bill, first introduced during last year’s monsoon session by then Deputy Chief Minister and current Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, has been debated widely. The Opposition has raised concerns over the wording and interpretation of specific clauses and terminology within the Bill.
The law is now set to be tabled in the Legislative Council, where it is expected to pass. Following that, it will be sent to the Governor for final assent, after which it will officially become law.
The Bill’s statement of objects and reasons states that the threat of Naxalism is not only confined to remote regions of affected states but is slowly expanding into urban areas through ‘Naxal front organisations.’
The government claims that these ‘frontal organisations,’ are supporting armed Naxal cadres by providing logistics and safe refuge. According to the government, “existing laws are ineffective and inadequate to tackle this menace of Naxalism”.
The bill also points out that states like Chhattisgarh, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, and Odisha have enacted Public Security Acts and banned 48 ‘Naxal frontal organisations,’ in order to tackle this situation.
What does this Bill state?
The Bill empowers the government to designate any suspected “organisation” as an “unlawful organisation.” It outlines four specific offences that can lead to individual punishment: (i) being a member of such an unlawful organisation, (ii) raising funds for it even without being a member, (iii) managing or helping to manage its activities, and (iv) engaging in any act classified as an “unlawful activity.”
These offences are punishable with imprisonment ranging from two to seven years, along with fines between ₹2 lakh and ₹5 lakh. Among them, the act of committing an “unlawful activity” attracts the most severe penalty, seven years of imprisonment and a fine of ₹5 lakh.
Under the proposed law, the offences are classified as cognizable, allowing authorities to make arrests without a warrant. Additionally, these offences are non-bailable, limiting the possibility of immediate release on bail.
The Bill defines ‘unlawful activity’ as any act committed by an individual or organisation, whether through actions, spoken or written words, signs, visible representations, or any other means, that poses a threat to public order, peace, and tranquility. It also includes actions that disrupt the maintenance of public order, hinder the functioning of legal institutions and personnel, or aim to intimidate public servants through the use or threat of criminal force.
The Bill also includes within the scope of ‘unlawful activity’ acts such as engaging in or promoting violence, vandalism, or any actions that incite fear and anxiety among the public. Additionally, encouraging or advocating disobedience towards established laws and institutions, as well as collecting funds or resources to support any of these activities, are considered unlawful under the proposed legislation.
When the Bill was initially introduced at the end of the 2024 Monsoon Session of the Assembly, it could not be passed as the House was prorogued the very next day. Following the Assembly elections, in which Devendra Fadnavis assumed the role of Chief Minister, the Bill was reintroduced in December. Acknowledging the concerns raised by several organisations, Fadnavis announced that the Bill would be referred to a joint select committee and reconsidered only after all viewpoints and suggestions had been thoroughly examined.
The Joint Select Committee, chaired by BJP leader and state Revenue Minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule, consisted of 25 members from both Houses of the legislature and held five meetings between March 4 and June 26 this year. During this period, the Committee received over 1,200 suggestions and objections from a wide range of stakeholders, including opposition parties, NGOs, and citizens, up to the April 15 deadline.
Objections were raised about the open-ended nature of definitions, particularly of terms like “unlawful activity.” Some organisations, such as the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), demanded the complete withdrawal of the Bill.
Eventually, the Committee introduced three amendments to the original Bill.
1. The first amendment pertained to the “long title and preamble”. Initially, it read: “A Bill to provide far more effective prevention of certain unlawful activities of individuals and organisations and for matters connected….,”. The introduction to the amended Bill states that “since the Bill intends to destroy Urban Naxalism, the Committee opined to bring clarity on this aspect”, and accordingly changed the phrase unlawful activities of individuals and organisations to “unlawful activities of Left Wing Extremist organisations or similar organisations…”.
2. The second amendment was made to clause 5(2) of the Bill, which states that “the Advisory Board shall consist of three persons who are or have been or qualified to be appointed as judge of the High Court. The Government shall appoint the members and designate one of them as the Chairperson.” The Committee recommended that the Board should comprise a Chairperson who is or has been a judge of the High Court, and two members., one of whom shall be a retired judge and the other a government pleader of the High Court, both appointed by the state government.
3. The third amendment was made to clause 15(2). Instead of the acts defined under the Bill being investigated by a police officer not below the rank of Sub Inspector, it was proposed that the investigation be entrusted to officers of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Rickelton's ton in vain as SRH beat MI by 6 wickets
Mumbai (PTI): Ryan Rickelton's whirlwind unbeaten ton was overshadowed by Heinrich Klaasen's unbeaten 65 as Sunrisers Hyderabad defeated Mumbai Indians by six wickets in an IPL match here on Wednesday.
Chasing an imposing 244-run target, Travis Head (76 off 30) and Abhishek Sharma (45 off 24) shared 129 runs for the opening wicket to set the platform for SRH.
Klaasen (65 not out off 30 balls) then displayed his all-round hitting abilities to guide SRH home with the help of Nitish Kumar Reddy (21) and Salil Arora (30 not out off 10) in 18.4 overs.
Earlier, Rickelton's knock powered MI to 243 for five.
MI rode on a 93-run stand between Rickelton (123 not out off 55 balls) and Will Jacks (46 off 22) in 7.1 overs for the opening stand to power the side.
MI skipper Hardik Pandya scored a valuable 31 off 15 balls before being dismissed.
Praful Hinge (2/54), Eshan Malinga (1/29), Sakib Hasan (1/39) and Nitish Kumar Reddy (1/31) were the wicket-takers for SRH.
Brief Scores:
Mumbai Indian: 243 for 5 in 20 overs (Ryan Rickelton 123 not out; Praful Hinge 2/54).
Sunrisers Hyderabad: 249 for 4 in 18.4 overs (Travis Head 76, Heinrich Klaasen 65 not out; AM Ghazanfar 2/51).
