Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court has recently quashed an FIR filed against a customer of a bar who was booked under Section 294 (Obscene Act & Songs) of IPC while observing that encouraging women in a bar does not amount to an obscene act.

“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.,” the order reads.

A division bench of the high court comprising Justice AS Gadkari and Justice Neela Gokhale was hearing a petition filed by a man seeking to quash the FIR.

The prosecution alleged that the raiding party saw women masquerading as waitresses dancing in an obscene manner and customers throwing Indian currency notes towards the women.

It was also alleged the customers were encouraging the dancing women to make obscene gestures while dancing. The petitioner was found to be one of the customers watching the obscene dance and acts of the women.  

The petitioner contended that merely being present in a situation where obscene acts are done by another person, where he is merely a spectator does not attract the provisions of Sections 294 and 114 of the I.P.C.

He further submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner that he indulged in any obscene act and thus he is not liable to be prosecuted for the alleged offence.

The bench agreed with the contentions of the petitioners and quashed the FIR while observing that, “..it is necessary that, the accused person indulges in doing any obscene act in a public place or singing, reciting or uttering any obscene song in or near a public place. 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,” the order reads.

Case title: Mitesh Ramesh Punmiya vs State of Maharashtra