Mumbai: The term “Urban Naxal” has been replaced with “extreme Left-wing ideology” in the controversial Special Public Security Bill aimed at curbing “urban Naxalism”, following revisions recommended by the Maharashtra assembly’s joint select committee.
The Bill was tabled by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis in the Assembly Thursday.
Revenue Minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule presented the Joint Select Committee’s report on the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024, in the state Legislative Assembly Wednesday, with certain amendments.
One of the major concerns regarding the Bill was whether it would target political parties. However, Bawankule, who heads the committee, clarified while tabling the report in the Assembly that it will not target any political organizations. “We have brought clarity to the Bill, which aims to tackle the illegal activities of extreme Left-minded individuals and organisations,” he said in the assembly. ThePrint has accessed a copy of the report.
He added that the committee had met five times since December, when it was formed, and received over 12,500 suggestions, which came from public domain.
The controversial term “urban Naxal”, he said, has been replaced with “extreme Left-wing ideology”.
As per the new changes, a decision by an advisory board is now mandatory before declaring any organisation unlawful. This three-member advisory board will include a sitting or retired High Court judge, along with district magistrates or government pleaders.
Another key change relates to the rank of the investigating officer. Earlier, in the bill, an officer of the rank of sub-inspector would investigate the offence. But now, the investigating officer would be of the rank of superintendent of police.
Bawankule said, “The suggestions of the opposition members in the joint select committee were also accepted. The government wants the Bill to be passed as it intends to prevent youth from being influenced by the Naxalite movement.”
The controversial Bill was first introduced during the monsoon session in July 2024, when the Mahayuti government was led by Eknath Shinde. However, it was not passed at the time. Later that year, after Devendra Fadnavis became Chief Minister in December, the Bill was reintroduced during the winter session of the Assembly and subsequently referred to the Joint Select Committee.
The opposition is treading cautiously, expressing hope that the final version of the Bill will be brought up for discussion.
“I agree that government’s stand on certain things has changed. For example, they have been talking about urban Naxal, but in my knowledge, ‘urban Naxal’ word is removed from the final draft of the bill,” said Jitendra Awhad, NCP(SP) MLA, who is also a part of the committee.
“But we still object to certain things in the Bill. Whoever agrees or not, Left ideology exists in the country just like how Right ideology exists. Just because you don’t agree with it, you are trying to put those with Left ideology behind bars, this is not good,” Awhad added.
Also read: Jail term for ‘sympathisers’, power to seize property — what Maharashtra’s Public Security Bill says
Why the bill is controversial
When the Bill was reintroduced by Fadnavis in December, he said the proposed law is not aimed at suppressing genuine dissenting voices, but to close down the dens of “urban Naxals”.
“Naxalism is not restricted to remote rural parts alone, but frontal organisations have come up in urban areas as well which work towards creating distrust about the country and its institutions,” Fadnavis had said. “Even the anti-Naxal squads in Maharashtra wanted such a law to stop the activities of urban Naxals. This proposed law is not aimed at suppressing genuine dissenting voices, but to close down the dens of urban Naxals,” he said.
This had created a huge uproar, with the opposition questioning the need for a separate bill when laws like Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) exist to curb Naxalism.
However, the government defended its move by saying that even states like Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, and Odisha have enacted Public Security Acts for effective prevention of unlawful activities, and banned 48 frontal organisations.
Some of the sections in the Bill were seen as controversial, too. For instance, jail term even for those who aren’t members of “unlawful organisation” but “contribute/ receive/solicit any contribution or aid” or “harbour” members
Some provisions in the Bill have drawn criticism for being controversial. For instance, it proposes jail terms not only for members of an “unlawful organisation” but also for those who “contribute, receive, or solicit any contribution or aid,” or who “harbour” its members.
The section in the Bill that allows any organisation to be deemed unlawful by an advisory board set up by the government has now been revised. The Bill states, “Where the government is satisfied after such enquiry as it may think fit, that any moneys, securities or other assets are being used or intended to be used for the purpose of an unlawful organisation, the government may… declare such moneys, securities or other assets… to be forfeited to the government.”
It adds, “Whoever is a member of an unlawful organisation or takes part in meetings or activities of any such organisation or contributes or receives or solicits any contribution for the purpose of any such organisation” will be punished with a jail term extending up to 3 years and a fine of up to Rs 3 lakh. This has not yet changed.
Those not a member of the unlawful organisation in any manner but who “contributes or receives or solicits any contribution or aid for such organisation or harbours any member of such organisation” will be punished with imprisonment up to two years and be liable for a fine of up to Rs 2 lakh.
(Edited by Zinnia Ray Chaudhuri)
Also read: ‘Old wine in new bottle?’ What is Maharashtra’s proposed law to tackle ‘urban naxalism’
