Acid attacks in India
Kartavya Desk Staff
Source: TH
Subject: Society/ Women Issues
Context: The acquittal of the main accused in the 2009 Delhi acid attack case involving survivor and activist Shaheen Malik has renewed focus on India’s weak conviction record in acid attack cases.
About Acid attacks in India:
What it is?
• An acid attack involves throwing or administering corrosive substances (commonly sulphuric, hydrochloric, or nitric acid) with intent to disfigure, maim, or permanently harm a person.
• These attacks cause severe burns, blindness, long-term disability, psychological trauma, and social exclusion, and are overwhelmingly gendered crimes against women.
Trends in India:
• Reported cases (NCRB 2023): 207 acid attack cases reported (up from 202 in 2022 and 176 in 2021). 65 cases of attempted acid attacks.
• 207 acid attack cases reported (up from 202 in 2022 and 176 in 2021).
• 65 cases of attempted acid attacks.
• Judicial outcomes (2023): 703 cases pending in courts. Only 16 convictions and 27 acquittals recorded during the year.
• 703 cases pending in courts.
• Only 16 convictions and 27 acquittals recorded during the year.
• State-wise concentration (2023): West Bengal (57), Uttar Pradesh (31), Gujarat (15) reported the highest cases.
• West Bengal (57), Uttar Pradesh (31), Gujarat (15) reported the highest cases.
• Under-reporting: NGOs like Acid Survivors Trust International estimate ~1,000 attacks annually, indicating large-scale under-reporting due to stigma and fear.
• NGOs like Acid Survivors Trust International estimate ~1,000 attacks annually, indicating large-scale under-reporting due to stigma and fear.
Causes of acid attacks:
• Rejection and coercive control: Acid attacks are retaliatory acts to reassert male dominance when women refuse marriage or sexual advances, reflecting entitlement over consent. Courts view them as outcomes of structural power imbalance, not sudden rage.
• Domestic and family disputes: Dowry conflicts, marital discord, and suspicion of infidelity escalate into acid violence because disfigurement is intended as lifelong punishment, exposing how private patriarchy spills into public criminality.
• Patriarchal punishment for autonomy: Acid attacks aim to erase a woman’s identity and mobility for asserting independence. In Laxmi v. Union of India (2014), the Supreme Court held acid violence to be a permanent violation of Article 21 (life with dignity).
• Easy availability of acid: Weak enforcement of ID-based sales and stock registers allows cheap, anonymous access to acid, diluting the preventive intent of judicial guidelines.
• Low deterrence in criminal justice: Delayed investigation and prolonged trials reduce perceived risk for offenders. In Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India (2016), the Court noted that punishment without swift justice fails to deter calculated cruelty.
Government measures and legal framework:
• Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013: Introduced Sections 326A & 326B IPC (now Section 124, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita): Minimum 10 years to life imprisonment for acid attacks. 5–7 years for attempt. Victim compensation: Sections 357A–C CrPC mandate State Victim Compensation Schemes and free medical treatment in all hospitals. Supreme Court (Laxmi v. Union of India) mandated minimum ₹3 lakh compensation. Regulation of acid sales (SC guidelines, 2013): Photo ID for buyers, register maintenance, SDM oversight. Advisories by MHA (2013, 2015): Regulation of sale, fast-tracking of trials, rehabilitation support
• Introduced Sections 326A & 326B IPC (now Section 124, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita): Minimum 10 years to life imprisonment for acid attacks. 5–7 years for attempt.
• Minimum 10 years to life imprisonment for acid attacks.
• 5–7 years for attempt.
• Victim compensation: Sections 357A–C CrPC mandate State Victim Compensation Schemes and free medical treatment in all hospitals. Supreme Court (Laxmi v. Union of India) mandated minimum ₹3 lakh compensation.
• Sections 357A–C CrPC mandate State Victim Compensation Schemes and free medical treatment in all hospitals.
• Supreme Court (Laxmi v. Union of India) mandated minimum ₹3 lakh compensation.
• Regulation of acid sales (SC guidelines, 2013): Photo ID for buyers, register maintenance, SDM oversight.
• Advisories by MHA (2013, 2015): Regulation of sale, fast-tracking of trials, rehabilitation support
Challenges in prevention and justice
• Poor enforcement of acid sale rules: Despite Supreme Court directions, SDMs and local authorities are rarely penalised for illegal acid sales, creating regulatory impunity. Bangladesh’s experience shows that administrative accountability, not just criminal law, is crucial for prevention.
• Investigative lapses and evidentiary failure: Weak forensic linkage, poor motive reconstruction, and delayed charge-sheets cripple prosecutions. Courts have stressed that acid attack cases demand higher investigative standards due to the irreversible nature of harm.
• Judicial delays eroding survivor confidence: Trials extending over a decade convert justice into a second trauma for survivors. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that inordinate delay itself violates Article 21, especially in gender-based violence cases.
• Abysmally low conviction rates: Negligible convictions despite stringent laws indicate enforcement failure rather than legislative inadequacy.
• Inadequate and delayed rehabilitation: Though compensation is legally mandated, survivors often receive it years later after litigation. In Parivartan Kendra, the Court noted that ₹3 lakh is grossly insufficient for lifelong medical and psychological care.
Way ahead:
• Comprehensive ban on retail acid sale: Adopting a Bangladesh-style regime—licensed sale, criminal liability for sellers, and shop sealing—would convert Supreme Court guidelines into enforceable administrative law.
• Fast-track courts and time-bound trials: Acid attack cases must be tried within fixed timelines, aligning with MHA advisories and Article 21 jurisprudence on speedy justice.
• National lifelong rehabilitation fund: Implementing the Justice J.S. Verma Committee recommendation would ensure comprehensive support covering lifelong medical, psychological, educational, and livelihood needs.
• Strengthen deterrence through legal harmonisation: Reducing the moral and punitive gap between acid attack and attempt reflects the Court’s view that intent and potential harm are equally culpable.
Conclusion:
Acid attacks represent a brutal intersection of gender violence, weak enforcement, and judicial delay in India. Despite strong laws on paper, poor implementation and low conviction rates have blunted deterrence. A survivor-centric justice system—combining strict prevention, swift trials, and lifelong rehabilitation—is essential to end this crime.
Q.Incidents like acid attacks on women reveal moral bankruptcy of the Indian society and government. Comment. (150 Words)