New Delhi:The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the reply of the Maharasthra government on a petition filed by Bharatiya Bargirls Union challenging the constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women (working therein) Act, 2016 and the Rules.
A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman issued notice after hearing senior counsel Rajiv Dhavan and posted the matter along with similar petitions being heard by the same bench. The court directed the matter to be listed on April 20.
The petitioner union said it comprises women dancers, waitresses, singers and other performers (colloquially labelled as ‘bargirls’ in a derogatory sense) working in bar rooms, hotels, beer bars and such other establishments based in Maharashtra. It said the object of the law was to prevent obscenity in dance bars, which are derogatory to dignity of women.
Assailing the object of the Act, the Union said the new law and the rules unreasonably interfered with free choice of expression in dramatic performances, and the right of women to practice occupation of self-expression through such dramatic performances. The law imposes fetters on dancing as a form of entertainment and also fails to secure the rights of women performers from being stigmatised.
It said the concerns expressed by the state government that the dance bars encourage obscenity is based on ‘popular’ beliefs or perception, rather than real facts or material evidence. The legislative declaration of facts and beliefs are patently false, entirely irrational and devoid of material.
The provisions of the Act are manifestly arbitrary, excessive and substantively unreasonable. The existing laws and regulations adequate to govern the entire spectrum of dance performances in bars and restaurants. The existing local laws and rules permit the police to take steps to prevent obscene dances.
The petitioner said if the law is implemented it would result in complete prohibition of dance performances in dance bars, as the definition of ‘obscene dance’ is entirely vague and susceptible to abuse by the police, who have been given wide powers.
The state government has selectively portrayed performances in dance bars as innately obscene, while no such presumption of obscenity has ever been extended to performances on television or celluloid mediums whatsoever, the petitioner said.
It submitted that the dances enacted in dance bar are often choreographed to imitate performances of mainstream music, especially the Bollywood. As a matter of fact, performance of such kind is a common place during weddings and other ceremonies. Thus, the state government’s contention that only dance bars encourage obscenity or have adverse impact on moral health of customers is entirely untenable. It sought quashing of the law and an interim stay of its operation.
