Delhi court rules dancing in skimpy clothes not a crime, acquits 7 women in case
A Delhi court acquitted seven women accused of obscene dancing at a bar, saying that wearing shorts or dancing is not a crime.
A Delhi court recently acquitted seven women who were accused of performing obscene dances at a bar while allegedly wearing short clothes last year. While acquitting the seven women, the court observed that neither wearing shorts nor dancing is a crime, reported news agency ANI.
The case was registered last year in Delhi’s Paharganj when the women were accused of dancing obscenely at a bar, allegedly causing annoyance to people. However, due to lack of evidence, Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Neetu Sharma of Delhi’s Tis Hazari court acquitted the women.
“It is clear that the prosecution has failed to prove that any offence was committed or that the accused were involved in any offence as projected by the prosecution in this case. Accordingly, accused persons are acquitted of offences in the present case,” she said in her order dated February 4, 2025.
According to the court, dancing while wearing skimpy clothes is not a crime, even if such is performed in public. However, if the dance is causing annoyance to the public, only then it can be considered punishable.
The case depended on the testimony of a Sub Inspector named Dharmender, who claimed that he saw some girls dancing on obscene songs while wearing short clothes while he was on patrolling duty. However, he did not mention that people were annoyed because of the dance.
While the prosecution claimed that the dance annoyed the people around, it failed to prove the same.
“It is clear that the police concocted a story but could not find support from public. In such circumstances, even if we accept the claim of SI Dharmender, the same will not establish the ingredient of the offence," the court said.
Bar Manager also acquitted
The prosecution also filed a case against the manager of the bar for allegedly violating an order to install CCTV cameras. However, the manager was also acquitted when the prosecution couldn’t prove that any such notification was ever published and that the accused had any knowledge of the order.
They failed to produce a copy of any newspaper that published the said order, nor could they mention the name of the newspaper and date of the publication of the order in question, the court said, according to the report.
With ANI inputs.