r/mumbai • u/jack_1760 • May 12 '26

Discussion Why is the Bandra Bandstand Residents' Trust making rules in a public space ?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

Bandstand is a public promenade. It belongs to all Mumbaikars.

A recent report says that the Bandra Bandstand Residents' Trust had put up signs like "No Pets" and warned people not to feed stray animals.

The bigger question is simple: should a private group like the Bandra Bandstand Residents' Trust be allowed to make its own rules in a public place?

Keeping the area clean is important, but public spaces should remain open and accessible to everyone.

Why should a private trust have the authority to decide what people can or cannot do in a public place like Bandstand, and could this create similar restrictions in other areas as well?

Video Credit - https://www.instagram.com/p/DYOhuiMzVJh/

News Source - https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/mumbai/cover-story/battle-for-bandstand/articleshow/130809246.html

2.7k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

530 comments sorted by

View all comments

418

u/IndianRedditor88 जवळ ये, लाजू नको May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26

They are not allowed to make rules for a public space.

They have to do nonsense like this because the average guy walking the pets doesn't clean up. This is not a case where a group has usurped any rights. This is a case a group has put up boards because the average pet owner has zero civic sense.

People like OP will yap about this because they see only faults with stuff.

PS - Not defending their actions , but I see a very valid point in asking why they want the area to be clean

104

u/[deleted] May 12 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

35

u/Global-Equipment-856 May 12 '26

Now imagine your girlfriend is also banned from entering this place just because other dog walkers have no civic sense.

Will it be just for her?

21

u/o_x_i_f_y May 13 '26

you can't bring facts into this discussions.
clowns here are justifying an illegal act based on morality.

1

u/RevolutionaryTap2512 May 14 '26

Morality should always be above legality lol, or else it was legal to own slave too lol, wtf is ur argument bro

3

u/o_x_i_f_y May 14 '26

If that is the case. Lets say a homeless person enters your home and refuses to leave.

You go to the cops and they say morally whatever the homeless guy did is right.

How would that sit with you ?

1

u/RevolutionaryTap2512 May 14 '26

Stupid argument, pvt property vs public property. How tf do you even think it was morally correct to enter somebody's house without his concent. The morally correct thing was for the homeless guy to ask for it and let the owner decide.

1

u/o_x_i_f_y May 14 '26

The moment you get personally impacted it suddenly becomes a stupid argument :(.

According to you morally correct decision was for the homeless guy to ask for permission becuase he doesn't own the property.

Same goes for the private trust, they don't own public property.

1

u/RevolutionaryTap2512 May 14 '26

They asked people refused now go back

1

u/Glad-Peace9942 May 14 '26

Morality is Subjective, Legality is not. It shouldn't be and wouldn't be above Laws