‘Maharashtra Has Emerged As Hub For Urban Maoist Networks’: Govt Defends MSPSA In Bombay HC

Mumbai, October 7, 2026: The Maharashtra government has told the Bombay High Court that the growing presence of urban Maoist networks in the State necessitated a special legal framework to tackle unlawful and subversive activities, while defending the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Special Public Security Act (MSPSA), 2024.

In an affidavit filed through Home Department Deputy Secretary Pritamkumar Jawale, the State said Maharashtra had emerged as a focal point for urban Maoist activities and cited Ministry of Home Affairs data to claim that 64 active frontal organisations were operating in the State, the highest number in the country.

Petition Challenges Constitutional Validity

The government was responding to a petition filed by the Indian National Congress, Communist Party of India and social activists challenging the constitutional validity of the Act. It urged the HC to dismiss the plea, contending that the petitioners had failed to show any direct legal injury or personal grievance to establish their locus standi.

“A person cannot file a petition challenging constitutional validity for his curiosity or for academic exercise and must have a real grievance and legal injury to maintain a petition,” the affidavit stated.

State Defends Need For Special Law

The State maintained that the Act was enacted to provide “a robust legal framework to prevent and tackle unlawful, subversive, and extremist activities”. It said the legislation seeks to strike a balance between fundamental liberties and the State’s duty to protect public order and national integrity.

Rejecting allegations that the law was brought in without adequate public consultation, the government said a Joint Committee had considered more than 15,000 objections and suggestions before the legislation was enacted. Following the exercise, the scope of the law was narrowed to specifically cover “left wing extremist organisations”, while investigations were required to be conducted by senior officers of the rank of Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Superintendent of Police.

Safeguards Against Misuse

The State also defended the legislature’s competence to enact the law, saying it falls within “Public Order”, covered by Entry 1 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.

Addressing concerns over possible misuse against individuals or organisations, the government pointed to safeguards built into the legislation. It said a declaration banning an organisation would not take effect unless confirmed by an Advisory Board headed by a sitting or retired High Court judge.

Also Watch:

The affidavit further said an aggrieved party could challenge such a declaration before the High Court through a revision petition.

Terming the challenge “devoid of any substance and merits”, the State sought dismissal of the petition.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/