The court, however, sought response from the state government on a plea by the bar owners challenging the new law.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to stay Maharashtra government's new law on dance bars that prohibits serving liquor in performance areas and mandates that the premises must shut by 11:30 pm. It also imposes heavy penalties on dance bar owners and customers for flouting these rules.
The court, however, sought response from the state government on a plea by the bar owners challenging the new law. It agreed to hear the Maharashtra government on September 21 before granting any interim relief to the bar owners.
The new law – Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women (working therein) Act, 2016 – was passed by the State Assembly to circumvent a Supreme Court judgment of 2014 which ordered dance bars to be thrown open again and classified dance as a profession.
"Our judgment was founded on Article 19 of the Constitution (freedom of profession). How can the foundation of our judgment be taken away by a statutory law?" a bench of Justices Dipak Misra observed.
Picking up each provision of the 2016 law which they found "objectionable", senior advocate Jayant Bhushan, who appeared for the bar owners, said the law is "vague".
One of the conditions imposed by Maharashtra government is that a member of the audience at a bar dance performance cannot "throw or shower" currency notes or coins at the performers.
Supporting the government, Justice Misra said the court did not find this condition prima facie objectionable adding "...Throwing money at dancers affects the dignity of the women."
"But money is handed over to singers during performance. It is a gesture of recognition of their talent. So giving money to singer is alright and not to a dancer?" Bhushan asked.
Another condition in the law is that dancers should be employed and paid monthly salaries.
Senior advocate Rajeev Dhawan, appearing for the dancers' association, argued that "why should we be held in captive employment in one place. We are professionals who move from one show to another in various establishments. Right to perform is an independent right of a professional."
Bhushan also raised several other objections to the law, including installation of CCTVs in dance areas and how dance bar owners are liable to be imprisoned for three years for 'abetment' of an obscene act while an obscene act attracts only three months under the Indian Penal Code.
The bar owners said the new law stipulates that bars should not be within 1-km distance from places of religious and educational interests, making most of space-starved Mumbai ineligible for setting up a bar.
To this, state government counsel Shekhar Naphade said the bar owners cannot put the law under a microscope and should focus on whether the law violates their right to conduct business.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Supreme Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}