Mere Presence In Bar Watching Obscene Dance Of Women Does Not Attract Offence U/S 294 IPC: Bombay HC

The FIR stemmed from a raid conducted by the Social Work Department of the Mumbai Police at the Sea Princess Bar and Restaurant. During the raid, the police observed women dressed as waitresses dancing provocatively and customers, including petitioner, engaging in activities that were deemed objectionable. It was reported that some customers threw currency notes at the dancers and encouraged them to perform in a provocative manner.

A division bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale observed, “There is no material on record to indicate that, the Petitioner who is either doing any obscene act or singing or uttering any obscene song. There is only a generic statement pertaining to the customers found in the Bar and Restaurant that they were enjoying the show and ‘encouraging’ the women artistes. The Petitioner is not found to have been doing any explicit act that can demonstrate an external manifestation of the term ‘encouraging’. He was not found to be throwing notes of Indian currency on the dancing women. Furthermore there is also no material to suggest that, the Petitioner was an abettor present when the offense was committed.”

Advocate Rutuj Warick appeared for the petitioner and Advocate Vinod Chate appeared for the respondent.

The court noted that there was only a general statement suggesting that customers, including petitioner, were enjoying the performance and encouraging the dancers, but no explicit actions or behaviors were demonstrated.

The court referred to prior rulings, including the Nirav Raval vs. State of Maharashtra case, which established that simply being present in a bar where such activities occur does not meet the threshold for charges of obscenity.

Given these considerations, the Court concluded that the FIR against petitioner lacked sufficient grounds for prosecution under Section 294 IPC and consequently quashed it.

Cause Title: Mitesh Ramesh Punmiya v. The State of Maharashtra, [2024:BHC-AS:36328-DB]

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Rutuj Warick a/w Shubhankar Avhad i/b Anuj Tiwari