Bombay High Court orders probe into 2012 party with liquor, bar dancers at shelter home

Nearly 12 years after the incident came to light, the Bombay High Court has ordered a formal inquiry into a 2012 New Year's Eve party that allegedly involved liquor being served and bar dancers performing in front of 26 mentally challenged girls who were brought to the event without official permission [Sangeeta Sandeep Punekar v State of Maharashtra & Ors]..A Division Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne on Monday directed the Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities to conduct an inquiry into the incident and submit a report to the Maharashtra government within six weeks. .The State has been further ordered to take suitable action based on the findings and file a compliance report within three months.The Court’s directive came in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in 2014 by social worker Sangeeta Sandeep Punekar..In her petition, Punekar alleged that an unauthorized New Year entertainment programme had been held at Agrawal Hall, located within the boys' section of the Children Aid Society Shelter Home in Mankhurd on 31 December, 2012. Bar dancers were reportedly invited to perform, liquor was served, and the 26 mentally challenged girls were made to attend the party, returning only at around 3:15 am..According to the petition, no permission had been sought for the event, and the matter was allegedly suppressed by the authorities. Although the Trombay Police gave a clean chit to the organizers at the time, the petitioner argued that the incident was never properly investigated.In its first order dated August 6, 2014, the High Court described the allegations as “shocking” and directed the Crime Branch to investigate. The Court also ordered the formation of a committee comprising members from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences and the Child Welfare Committee. Further directions were issued for the protection of whistleblowers, some of whom reportedly faced threats from senior officials..Despite these early directives, the matter remained unresolved for over a decade. On June 16, 2025, the Court expressed sharp displeasure at the delay in taking action."A petition cannot be kept pending like this for 11 years. You (State authorities) cannot protect wrongdoers. Action has to be taken. Have you conducted any enquiry? What action have you taken? We direct you to take action. In other ways we will [initiate] contempt,” the Bench observed.Further criticizing State authorities, the Court added: “You should be ashamed of your officers. You have the guts to say that we’ll find out?"The Court noted that the authorities failed to show any action taken against persons responsible for the incident, subsequent to which it has now ordered further action.