‘Outside’ food ban in cinemas irks Bombay High Court

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Thursday asked the Maharashtra government to focus only on the security aspect in theatres instead of compelling audience to purchase food on the premises. The court has accordingly asked the government to file a detailed reply explaining the ‘rationale’ behind a ban on bringing outside food into a cinema hall.

The division bench of Justice Ravindra Borde and Justice Rajesh Ketkar was hearing a PIL filed by Jainendra Baxi, who has challenged the ban contending that it is illegal as it violates their fundamental right to life.

Advocate Aditya Pratap appearing for Baxi apprised the judges of how the general public is barred from bringing in their personal food inside the cinema halls. He also highlighted the manner in which the food outlets (inside theatres) operate and charge more than the Maximum Retail Price (MRP).

“The Maharashtra Cine-ma (Regulation) Rules are being openly flouted by almost every theatre in the city since they are selling food on their premises. The rules prohibit hawking in theatres but still the general public is compelled to purchase food from the stalls in the theatres,” Pratap argued. Having heard Pratap, the judges sought to know from the government if any steps have been undertaken by the theatre owners to allow outside food.

After getting a negative response, Justice Borde said, “We think you (government) must only focus on the security aspect. Especially when you have metal detectors and other security equipment with which you can detect even the presence of a knife. We fail to understand why are you bothered about food brought by the audience and compel them to purchase it on the premises, given the fact that you can check their purse, bag and every belonging.”

Taking a similar view, Justice Ketkar said, “We want to know the rationale behind this ban and if this is in accordance with law. Let us clarify, we only want you to implement the Rules in letter and spirit and take this matter to its logical end.”

The judges have granted three weeks’ time to the  government to respond to the petition.