Rent agreement in Maharashtra: what is law, what is a police order, what "2026 rules" are not

Rules as of 13 October 2026.

Two things get mixed up in Maharashtra rental talk: what the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 actually requires, and what the police ask landlords to send in. A third thing, the so-called "2026 rent rules" doing the rounds, appears to be something else altogether. Here is what the primary texts and orders say, and what I could not confirm.

1. The law on the agreement: section 55 of the Rent Control Act

Section 55 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 says a leave and licence or letting agreement made after the Act came into force must be in writing and registered under the Registration Act, 1908. The landlord is responsible for getting it registered. If there is no registered written agreement, the tenant's version of the terms prevails unless the landlord proves otherwise. A landlord who breaks the section can, on conviction, be punished with up to three months in jail, a fine of up to ₹5,000, or both.

That ₹5,000 figure is the one circulating as a "new" penalty. It is an existing ceiling in a 1999 law, and it applies to the landlord.

2. The "11 months" myth

Section 17(1)(d) of the Registration Act makes leases "from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent" compulsorily registrable. The statute says one year, not eleven months; "11 months" is a habit built around that line. In Maharashtra, section 55 of the Rent Control Act goes further: on its text it asks for written and registered agreements without an 11-month exemption. A short agreement kept off the register is therefore a risk to the landlord, not a shortcut.

3. Tenant details to the police

Here the position is different: I found no section of the Rent Control Act or the Registration Act that obliges a landlord to report a tenant to the police. What exists are police orders and a digital link, reported as follows (I have not seen the orders themselves):

• Orders under criminal procedure law. Pune Police's drive of 8 August 2026 against 113 landlords and PG operators was reported as action under section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for breaching orders issued under section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Landlords were asked to submit tenant details to the local police station, online through the Pune Police citizen portal. In May 2023, Mumbai Police issued a 60-day order requiring owners to submit tenant details on its portal, reported with section 188 of the old IPC as the penalty.
• Penalty. Section 223 BNS punishes knowing disobedience of a public servant's lawful order. If it causes or risks obstruction or annoyance, the punishment is up to six months, a fine up to ₹2,500, or both; if it endangers life, health or safety, up to one year, a fine up to ₹5,000, or both.
• Digital link. Reports in March and June 2025 quoted the Registration and Stamps Department saying data from e-registered leave and licence agreements would flow to police stations through CCTNS, so tenants need not visit in person. Landlords who still use stamp-paper agreements in rural areas were reported to continue submitting details manually.

Because such orders are time-bound and set by each police commissionerate, check the current order for your city before relying on any summary.

4. The "2026 rent rules" claim

Posts promising "2026 rent rules" usually list a security deposit cap, a 90-day notice for rent increases, a mandatory registered agreement and a police check. The deposit cap and the registration scheme come from the Model Tenancy Act, 2021. The Union Cabinet approved it on 2 June 2021 "for circulation to all States / Union Territories" so that they could adopt it by new legislation or by amending existing laws. PRS India's brief notes it takes effect only where a state adopts it, and records a deposit cap of two months' rent for homes and six months for non-residential premises, with agreements to be intimated to a Rent Authority within two months.

A Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs release of 25 July 2022 named Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Assam as states that had revised their tenancy laws on the Model Act's lines. It did not name Maharashtra. I found no 2026 Maharashtra notification adopting the Model Act, so I am not treating those rules as law here. I also could not confirm a 90-day rent-increase notice in a primary text.

Worked example (illustrative)

A Mumbai landlord lets a flat at ₹40,000 a month and asks for six months' deposit: ₹2,40,000. Under the Model Act's cap for homes (two months), the deposit would be ₹80,000, a gap of ₹1,60,000. That cap would bind only if Maharashtra adopted it; I did not find a deposit cap in section 55, so any limit would come from your agreement.

Item	Source	Status in Maharashtra
Written, registered agreement; fine up to ₹5,000 for landlord	Rent Control Act 1999, s.55	In force
Lease over one year must be registered	Registration Act 1908, s.17(1)(d)	In force
Tenant details to police	Police orders (BNSS s.163; BNS s.223 for breach)	Reported; check current local order
Deposit cap of 2 months, Rent Authority	Model Tenancy Act 2021	Not found adopted

Mistakes to avoid

• Relying on an unregistered agreement because it is "only for 11 months".
• Assuming the tenant has to do the police formality; the orders reported are addressed to landlords.
• Quoting "2026 rules" to a landlord or tenant without a gazette notification.

This is information, not legal advice; ask an advocate before a dispute escalates.