Is the Maharashtra government bent on killing dance bars?

The Maharashtra government, it would appear, is in no mood to allow dance bars to return to the State. This is just one of the inferences that could be drawn following today’s hearing in the Supreme Court of India..After amending the Maharashtra Police Act and inserting a Section33A to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling of 2013, the Maharashtra has now gone ahead and enacted a new statute..It is this new law, the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women (Working therein) Act, 2016 that is now under challenge before the Supreme Court..Furthermore, the Rules framed under the Act have also been challenged before the Supreme Court by the Indian Hotels and restaurant Association (Petitioner)..A Bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and C Nagappan issued notice to the Maharashtra government in the case today..Senior Advocate Jayant Bhushan appeared for the petitioners. Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand and Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade represented the Maharashtra government. Senior advocate Rajiv Dhavan appeared for the Bar Girls Association..The petitioners have multiple grievances against the Act and the Rules framed by the State of Maharashtra, a few of which are detailed below:.1) The definition of ‘obscene dance’, as laid down in Section 2(8) is extremely vague and therefore unconstitutional. The petitioner cited the recent case of Shreya Singhal to buttress this argument, stating that a law that was too vague would not be able to justify its Constitutionality..2) The condition in the Rules, with regard to the time limit of 11.30 pm is openly discriminatory, and restrictive to boot..3) The Rule saying mandating throwing or handing over of currency to dancers was ill-founded. The monetary generosity may as well be due to an extraordinary performance, and was in no way different from a ‘tip’..4) The employment rule laid down that dancers would have to be employed on a monthly salary, on contractual basis. To this contention, the petitioner averred that like any other artiste, a dancer in a dance bar must be afforded the creative freedom to pick and choose their place of performance..At this point, senior counsel Rajiv Dhavan, thought it pertinent to inform the court that the bar girls themselves would rather a restrictive condition like this be removed..However, the rule relating to the minimum age of minimum dancers being fixed at 21 was not opposed..While the Court was inclined to pass an order for interim relief as certain rules were in blatant opposition to the court’s previous judgment, it was swayed by opposition from the respondents, who insisted they be heard on the matter first. The State of Maharashtra now has to file a response within six weeks..The Supreme Court, in 2013, had upheld a judgment of the Bombay High Court which had amendments to the Bombay Police Act thereby prohibiting dance performances in eating houses, permit rooms and Beer bars..Subsequently, the Maharashtra government had amended the Maharashtra Police Act and inserted Section 33A to clamp down on dance bars. The same was already under challenge before the Supreme Court when the Maharashtra government decided to enact the new statute.