Gadchiroli, Jul 29 (PTI) Former Maharashtra home minister and NCP (SP) leader Anil Deshmukh on Tuesday expressed apprehension that a special security bill passed by the state legislature may be used against opposition leaders and government critics.

The Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024, approved by both houses of the legislature during the just concluded monsoon session, seeks to prevent unlawful activities of Left-wing extremist organisations with focus on cracking down on urban Naxalism.

Amid opposition criticism, the Mahayuti government has asserted the bill has enough safeguards to prevent misuse.

Talking to reporters in Gadchiroli, where some parts are affected by Naxalism, Deshmukh claimed provisions of the legislation can be used against political leaders, farmers, social activists, journalists and others who dare to speak against the government.

The NCP (SP) leader raised the issue of alleged misuse of central agencies like the Enforcement Directorate and noted even the Supreme Court has made critical comments about the ED and its reading of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) provisions.

Deshmukh informed that NCP (SP) president Sharad Pawar will flag off a yatra in Nagpur on August 9, a party event aimed at educating people about the latter's contributions to the welfare of OBC communities.

Yatra participants will tell people how Pawar implemented Mandal Commission recommendations for OBCs in Maharashtra when he was chief minister, he added. PTI COR CLS RSY

Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill may be used against opposition and critics, raising concerns over safeguards and misuse. The Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024 seeks to prevent unlawful activities by left wing extremist organisations with a focus on urban Naxalism, and the government maintains the Bill contains safeguards against misuse. Critics contend the Bill's scope could be used against political leaders, farmers, social activists and journalists for speaking against the government, citing broader concerns about selective enforcement under financial and criminal statutes and judicial commentary on interpretations of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.