Bombay High Court Justice Gautam Ankhad Recuses From Hearing Pleas Challenging Public Safety Act Over Claims Of Stifling Free Speech

Bombay High Court judge Justice Gautam Ankhad on Monday (August 10) recused himself from hearing a bunch of petitions filed by the Indian National Congress (INC), the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) and also the Communist Party of India (Marxist) challenging the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Special Public Security Act, (MSPSA) 2025 The three political parties have argued that the MSPSA violates the fundamental guarantees enshrined in the Constitution of India including principles of reasonableness and proportionality, freedom of speech and expression, etc.Notably, the MSPSA is being said to be a controversial enactment designed to curb activities and organisations perceived by the State Government to be threats to public order, peace, and tranquility. It was originally proposed as a measure to combat Left-Wing Extremism and 'Urban Naxals'.The Act defines certain activities by an individual or an organisation as unlawful, which may include any action or speech that constitutes danger to public order, incites violence, disrupts communication, or encourages disobedience to established law and its institutions. It also empowers the State Government to designate an organisation as unlawful for engaging in unlawful activities and to take possession of property, and forfeit property and funds of such an organisation.The petition came up for hearing on Monday before a division bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad. Maharashtra's Advocate General Dr Milind Sathe urged the bench to dismiss the said petitions alleging that they were 'frivolous.'Senior advocate Navroze Seervai representing the AITUC countered saying that the MSPSA is 'frivolous' and 'unconstitutional' and not the petitions. However, Justice Ankhad said he cannot hear the petitions and recused from hearing. Accordingly, the bench passed an order directing the Registry not to list these petitions before a bench of which Justice Ankhad is a member. Notably, the petition filed through INC, Maharashtra unit and its leaders, states that the said Act confers wide-ranging arbitrary and excessive powers upon the executive to ban and proscribe organisations without any judicial scrutiny or oversight on the basis of vague and over broad definitions of 'unlawful activity' and 'unlawful organisation' thereby having a chilling effect upon the constitutionally protected rights to freedom of speech and expression, peaceful assembly and associations or unions etc."This Act violates the guarantee of due process under Article 21 by permitting the banning of an organisation without affording a prior hearing or disclosing the material forming the basis of the subjective satisfaction of the executive and by permitting unilateral extension of a notification banning an organisation without any judicial review and without any recourse to challenge an executive order before independent courts or tribunals," the plea reads.Further the plea states that the Act penalises and criminalises even persons who are not members of banned organisations merely based on suspicion or guilt by association, thereby criminalising beliefs and thoughts and creating penal offences in the absence of the essential ingredient of mens rea.The plea also objections to the 'uncanalised and unrestricted' powers conferred upon the District Magistrates and the Commissioner of Police to notify and take possession of premises, attach property including moveable and immoveable property and evict persons residing therein without a hearing and without prescribing any fair, just and reasonable procedure for doing so, while also failing to prescribe any mechanism for return of forfeited property, thereby violating Article 300A of the Constitution of India.The petition therefore seeks a declaration that the MSPSA is unconstitutional being ultra vires to Articles 14, 19(1)(a) to 19(1)(c), 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India. It also seeks a directive to the State not to enforce the said Act or take coercive action against anyone till the present plea is heard and decided. In the interim, the plea also seeks a stay on the operation of the Act.Case Title: Indian National Congress (Maharashtra) vs State of Maharashtra [Writ Petition (L) 20609 of 2026]

Bombay High Court Justice Gautam Ankhad Recuses From Hearing Pleas Challenging Public Safety Act Over Claims Of Stifling Free Speech

Narsi Benwal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Narsi Benwal

Bombay High Court Justice Gautam Ankhad Recuses From Hearing Pleas Challenging Public Safety Act Over Claims Of Stifling Free Speech

Narsi Benwal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Narsi Benwal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers