|
While bar girls and dance bar owners are celebrating their court victory, there is uncertainty over when the state's dance bars, which employ around 75,000 bar owners, will re-open, as the Maharashtra government plans to contest the high court decision in the Supreme Court of India
In a verdict that could restore the livelihoods of bar dancers all over Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court has lifted the controversial ban on dance bars that was implemented by the state government on August 15, 2005, saying it was an act of discrimination on the part of the state as it violated Article 14 of the Constitution of India that guarantees the right to equality.
The court slammed the Maharashtra government for its double standards in allowing bar girls to dance in high-end establishments and at independent performances, while banning it elsewhere, suggesting that the state had lost its battle on technical rather than human rights grounds.
The high court has given the government eight weeks to challenge the verdict that set aside the Bombay Police (Amendment) Act 2005, a legislation banning dance performances at eating outlets and bars. Alternatively, the state has eight weeks in which to re-issue cancelled licences.
The April 12 verdict was delivered on a batch of petitions filed by the Bharatiya Bar Girls' Union, the Association of Hotels and Restaurants (AHAR) and civil society organisations (CSOs) like the Forum Against Oppression of Women and Majlis.
However, an appeal could set the stage for a tough battle because the court has not upheld the basic contention of the petitioners -- that the ban violated the fundamental rights of bar girls.
In the eight-page order, Justices F I Rebello and Roshan Dalvi held that the ban did not violate the right to freedom of expression or the right to life and earning a livelihood. The petitioners had challenged the Act on grounds that it violated these fundamental rights.
The bench criticised the distinction in the law between "prohibited" establishments and "exempted" establishments. Section 33 B of the amended Act states that the ban on dance performances does not apply to dance performances at drama theatres, cinema theatres, auditoriums, sports clubs or gymkhanas, "three-starred and above hotels", or any other establishment getting special permission from the state government for the purpose of tourism or cultural activities.
Referring to Article 19 (6) of the Constitution, the high court said the amendment was a restriction that "prevents bar owners from organising the same or similar dances as in the exempted establishments and bar dancers from performing dances other than those which are restricted". The bench held that such a restriction was "unreasonable, not in the public interest and consequently void".
The bench noted: "Considering that the object of the legislation is to prevent dances which are obscene, vulgar or immoral and hence derogatory to the dignity of women, we find that there is no nexus between the classification and the object of the Act."
It added: "If women, other than as dancers, can work in the prohibited establishments, and that does not amount to exploitation, we do not see why when women dance to earn their livelihood it becomes exploitation."
This suggests that if the government removes the law's anomalies the amendment could stand the test of law. There are also concerns that the high court verdict could prompt the state government to bring in a new law that bans dancing everywhere and bars women from working as waitresses in dance bars.
But this would be an extreme step; the government is more likely to challenge the high court's verdict in the Supreme Court of India.
Still, a jubilant contingent of bar dancers and owners celebrated what they termed a victory over the state government's legislation outside the court premises and thanked the court for putting them back in business. "It's a reasonable justice and I am very happy. This comes as a victory for us and today is the ultimate day of our fight," said vice-president of the Dance Bar Association, Manjit Singh Abrol.
"It's a victory and now even if we have to face a higher court, we have a victory in hand. We will win there too," said Varsha Kale, spokesperson, Bar Dancers Association. Kale added that while half the girls had taken up jobs as waitresses, after dancing was banned, around 15% had been forced into commercial sex work to earn a living. "Though the ban is now void, the harm done to the lives of these girls who had to take up prostitution is irreparable."
The high court also took notice of the state government's claim that minor girls were being forced to become bar dancers. Referring to studies by the NGO Prayas of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences and the Research Centre for Women's Studies at SNDT University, Justice Dalvi said only a small percentage of bar dancers were minors. "Though the state has not shown actual trafficking of these children, if any are indeed found serving in dance bars, it would be in a place undesirable and unsuitable to their age."
The judge directed the two NGOs to hold inquiries and said: "In case of illegal employment of a minor in a dance bar, the matter must be reported to a police station for action against the bar owner and to rescue and rehabilitate those children."
Source: The Telegraph, April 13, 2006
The Hindu, April 13, 2006
www.ibnlive.com, April 12, 2006
www.ndtv.com, April 12, 2006
|
