Ads

Why Maharastra Government Ban Dance Performance in Dance Bar?

Why Maharastra Government Ban Dance Bar?

On Jan 17 S.C. struck down rules Governing Maharastra Dance Bar a part of 14 year game between Maharastra Government and Court.

Timeline 

2005

Maharastra Government imposes a ban on a Dance performance in Bars, Exception of Hotel rated 3 Star and above.

2009

The H.C. Decision came against the Government Decision that the ban is unacceptable as it breaks the RIght to Equality. 

2013

S. C. uphold Bombay H.C decision to not ban this Dance bar and allowed this Dance bar to function as they want, because of this discrimination between the 3-star hotels and the small dance bar.

2014

State government amends the earlier law by a provision of banning dance performance at all the places be it a normal Dance bar of the 3-star hotel.

2015

T. C. stays the 2015 law saying it was not different from 2005 act.

2016

A Dance bar regulation bill was passed in Maharashtra which allowed dance performance in bars but to take a license for this performance was made impossible because Government makes provisions and provided parameters which should be followed before applying for the license which parameters are impossible to be followed.

2019

S. C. relaxes 2016 provisions and made it possible for the bar owner and dancers to be followed easily.
Why Maharastra Government Ban Dance Performance in Dance Bar?


Why Ban was implemented at Dance Bar?

2005 the Maharastra Government impose a ban on a Dance performance in Bar, an exception was the Dance bar 3 star or above.

The reason given was that these Dance performances are obscene, morally corrupt, promoted prostitution and leads to harm the dignity of women.

The Maharastra Government also provide the reason that this Dance Performance would initiate human trafficking.

Following the ban, the license of the dance bar accepting the dance performance was canceled.

After this ban, a petition was filed by Indian Hotel and Restoration Association and Council for Restaraunt Association.

What are the 2016 Provisions passed by the Maharastra Government?

The Provision of Obscene Dance and Protection of the dignity of women Act, 2016 prohibits the dance performance in a bar if the dance bar did not meet the following condition -:


  • Good character should be possessed by the applicant with no criminal antecedents.
  • The dance bar should not be within 1km of educational and religious institutions.
  • There should be proper CCTV camera installed on the entrance of the bar.
  • Customer can not throw coins and currency on the Dancers.
  • Room where alcohol is served should be different from where the dancers are dancing.
  • Stage cannot be smaller than a prescribed size.
  • There should be no hidden room in the Dance bar.
  • Dance bar could only be opened till 11:30 pm.
  • There should be a contract of employment between the bar owner and Bar Dancers. 

What the Supreme Court said about the 2016 government proclamation?

On Jan 17, 2019, the Supreme Court upheld few provisions of the 2016 Provision of Obscene Dance and Protection of Dignity of Women Act, passed by the government and struck down others.

These provisions are as follows -:
The provisions of CCTV at the entrance violates the provision of privacy as per the article 21 of the Indian Constitution and is struck down.
The provision of Good Character possessed by the Bar Owner is Vague and is Struck Down.
The provision of the partition between the place where liquor is delivered and dance performance is performed is unjustified, and this provision was also struck down.
The provision that the Dance bar should be 1km away from the educational and religious institution is impractical, and it was struck down.
 The provision of Time Frame of before 11:30 pm was upheld.
There should be a contract of employment between the bar owner and Bar Dancers and was upheld.
There should be no Obseneti during the dance, this was upheld by the Supreme Court.

What was the impact of this ban?
The become very dreadful for the dancers and the dance bar owner as this has the following implications.

The Ban lead to unemployment of over 75000 women because of which they have to follow prostitution I.e. this results counterproductive.

85% of the Dancers were Migrant seeking a good opportunity in these urban dance bars to pay their bills in this urban locality.
As the Dancing age of cancer is between 18-30 but this case takes 14 years to conclude which kills many dancers currier and snatch their opportunity.
68% were divorced women, 72% were the sole breadwinner for there family and 42% are illiterate because of which this was the only way out of these women to live a sustainable life.
Conclusion
This was an act of moral policing by the government by pretending the morality and thinking about the morality of the people but the perception of obscenity and morality had changed now the people are more open to everything.  



Post a Comment

0 Comments