Observing that the "traditions and cultures must evolve with changing times and changing demographics of the city", the Bombay High Court on Wednesday directed the Maharashtra government to consider reframing comprehensive policy permitting celebration of festivals on public roads including dahi handi.
A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and Firdosh Pooniwalla expressed "concern about the manner in which the policy regulating celebration of such festivals has been framed" and remarked that the authorities would have to ask themselves whether permissions should be granted to hold such festivals in public places where huge crowds is expected to gather.
The court passed the directions while hearing a petition by member of Shiv Sena (UBT) group raising contention as to why they were denied permission to celebrate dahi handi festival at Shivaji Chowk in Kalyan. The permission was granted to one group belonging to Ravindra Rajaram Patil of Sena-led by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde at the same spot.
The Kalyan police informed the court that the petitioner group would be granted permission to celebrate the festival at an alternate ground nearby.
The same was accepted by the petitioners following which, the court asked the authorities concerned to grant permission by Wednesday evening.
However, the court raised concerns and asked the government to take a relook at its policy regulating celebration of such festivals.
"The policy, in our considered view, does not take into account the inconvenience and traffic congestion that may result on account of granting permissions to various groups which celebrate Dahi Handi festival in public streets and public squares of Mumbai," the court stated.
It added that if anybody contends that such celebrations are part of traditions, culture and social mores of the glorious city of Mumbai, the traditions and cultural practices must also evolve with changing time and changing demographics of the city.
The court also expressed that the city has witnessed influx of migrants and there had been no corresponding increase in infrastructure.
"Today, we are witness to great influx of migrants to this city and also inherent increase in population of Mumbai. We have also seen that the capacity of the public roads and public amenities has not been increased in proportion to increase in the population and its density," the court said.
"The Policy makers would have to ask a question to themselves as to whether or not permission should be given to celebrate the festivals at public squares and in public streets, where huge crowds/groups are expected to visit to take part in the celebrations," the added.
The Bombay High Court observed that policy makers also ought to consider inposing stricter conditions with regard to the number of participants, identifying the time slots within which such festivals be celebrated by different groups at the same venue and direct the organisers to restore the venues to their original condition, after the event is over.
"If the policy is re-framed or modified by taking into consideration all these aspects, we are of the view that there would be a proper balance struck between the need for public expression of religious sentiments on one hand and need for protecting larger public interest by reducing the inconvenience to the road users and the residents of near by localities and also reducing traffic congestion at such venues on the other hand," the bench said in its order.
"We hope that, from next year onwards, a modified policy regulating such festivals in a more effective way, by taking into consideration the suggestions given herein above, would be put in place by the concerned authorities," it said.
The bench noted that fifty years ago, the population in the city was not much but now public roads are no longer suitable to hold such events.
"Our open spaces are limited. You (authorities) should regulate otherwise it will be a chaotic situation. While you allow expression of religion on one hand, you should also ensure it does not affect public at large. Balance has to be struck," Justice Shukre said.
