I interpret the question as follows:
Given are two pdf's, $p_0$ and $p_1$, on $\mathbb{R}^d$ and a function $f\colon \mathbb{R}^d \to \mathbb{R}^k$. For any $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$, let
\begin{equation}
\hat c(x)\;\begin{cases}
=1&\text{ if } p_1(x)>p_0(x),\\
=0&\text{ if } p_1(x)<p_0(x),\\
\in\{0,1\}&\text{ if } p_1(x)=p_0(x),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
so that $\hat c(x)$ is the value -- given an observation $x$ -- of a maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) of the unknown parameter $c\in\{0,1\}$ that determines the pdf $p_c$.
Suppose next that for each $c\in\{0,1\}$ there exists a pdf $q_c$ of the random variable (r.v.) $Y=f(X)$ assuming that the pdf of the r.v. $X$ is $p_c$.
For any $x\in\mathbb{R}^d$, let
\begin{equation}
\tilde c(y)\;\begin{cases}
=1&\text{ if } q_1(y)>q_0(y),\\
=0&\text{ if } q_1(y)<q_0(y),\\
\in\{0,1\}&\text{ if } q_1(y)=q_0(y),
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
so that $\tilde c(y)$ is the value -- given an observation $y=f(x)$ -- of an MLE of the unknown parameter $c\in\{0,1\}$.
Consider the Bayes risks
\begin{align*}R(\hat c)&:=\tfrac12\,P_0(\hat c(X)=1)+\tfrac12\,P_1(\hat c(X)=0) \\
&=\tfrac12\,E_0\hat c(X)+\tfrac12-\tfrac12\,E_1\hat c(X)
\end{align*}
vs.
\begin{align*}
R(\tilde c)&:=\tfrac12\,P_0(\tilde c(f(X))=1)+\tfrac12\,P_1(\tilde c(f(X))=0) \\
&=\tfrac12\,E_0\tilde c(f(X))+\tfrac12-\tfrac12\,E_1\tilde c(f(X)),
\end{align*}
where $P_c$ and $E_c$ are respectively the probability and expectation computed assuming that $p_c$ is the pdf of $X$.
The question then appears to be the following: Can $R(\hat c)$ be greater than $R(\tilde c)$?
The answer is now clearly No, since $\hat c$ is a Neyman--Pearson test, and hence most powerful. Here is a brief proof:
\begin{align*}
2R(\tilde c)-2R(\hat c)
&=
E_1\hat c(X)-E_1\tilde c(f(X))-E_0\hat c(X)+E_0\tilde c(f(X)) \\
& =
\int[\hat c(x)p_1(x)-\tilde c(f(x))p_1(x)-\hat c(x)p_0(x)+\tilde c(f(x))p_0(x)]\,dx \\
&=\int[(\hat c(x)-\tilde c(f(x)))(p_1(x)-p_0(x))]\,dx\ge0,
\end{align*}
since $(\hat c(x)-\tilde c(f(x)))(p_1(x)-p_0(x))\ge0$
for all $x$.