This article is authored by Anvita Bhardwaj, currently pursuing B.A.LLB(Hons) from Symbiosis Law School, Noida. This article discusses Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code, which specifically deals with acid attacks.
Table of Contents
Introduction
A rampant increase is marked as the National Crime Records Bureau shows in its report the number of cases between 2014 and 2018 to be 1483 women. Acid attack is a form of gender-based violence against women wherein a person throws a corrosive acid, usually on her face, in order to cause her grievous hurt and disrupt her socio-economic life. This is done usually to avenge rejection towards sexual advances, affair proposals etc., in case of domestic violence it is administered by husband or in-laws in demand of dowry, or to showcase their superiority. According to the Acid Survivors Trust International, globally 15,000 cases occur and 80% of them victimize women making it a gender-based crime. In the cases, those target men generally the cause of such grievous hurt is a property dispute in India. The National Crimes Record Bureau in 2018 released a report that stated 228 cases of acid attacks were recognized in India. However, the real number of cases is likely to have exceeded 1000 but were unreported due to fear.
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 inserted Section 326A and Section 326B in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 creating special provisions for the victims of acid attack. The offenders convicted under these sections shall be imprisoned for a minimum sentence of ten years which may increase up to life imprisonment along with fine; that fine should cover the medical expenses incurred by the victim.
What does Section 326A talk about
The Eighteenth Law Commission which was headed by Justice A. R. Lakshaman introduced
Section 326 A of the IPC that criminalizes throwing or administering or attempting to throw acid on any person, irrespective of gender, with the intent to disfigure or maim that person causing him permanent or partial damage.
The following Section, i.e., Section 326B criminalizes attempts to throw or administer acid on any person.
Explanations
- The term “acid” can be used for any substance that is corrosive in nature. It could be a substance of burning nature. It should be capable of inflicting temporary or permanent disfigurement or disability to a person.
- For a person to be convicted under this offence it is not a requirement that the disfigurement must be irreversible in nature.
Essentials
- Throwing/attempting to throw/administering acid
- Causing grievous hurt
- Causes permanent or partial damage (burns, maims, disfigures or disables)
This offence is a cognizable and non-bailable offence.
Punishment for this offence
Under Section 326A punishment for administering an acid attack is a minimum ten years which may extend to life imprisonment upon the court’s discretion. The punishment for attempting to throw acid on a person is punishable for a time period of 5-7 years under Section 326B irrespective of the nature of the damage caused to the victim. The victim is liable for compensation, up to Rs. 3 lakhs. The compensation should be payable in addition to the payment of the fine by the culprit.
However, in my opinion, this punishment is not adequate. The victims suffer a great deal. For them, every visit to the doctor caused in relation to the acid attack should be borne by the convicted. Monthly, a specific amount of money should be set up that is sent to the victim as the convict’s actions have blotted the prospective economic opportunities. The convict should be made much more liable, and he should be asked to pay for any psychiatric sessions the victim undergoes having suffered the trauma inflicted by the convict.
The state should also do more to help victims; first and foremost the quantum of punishment should be increased so that deterrence towards this crime can be spread. Further, economic opportunities should be provided to the survivors. Rehabilitation centres should be set up in some parts of the country. Remember, the change in the law is successful only if it is well implemented.
Compensation under CrPC
The heinous crime of acid attack is not only dealt with by the IPC and the Indian Evidence Act but also contains relevant provisions in the CrPC. These provisions are contained in Section 375 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and contain six important sub-clauses.
Sub-Section (1) urges the state governments to draw schemes that provide compensation to those victims of an acid attack that require rehabilitation. This should be done under the guidance of the central government.
Sub-Section (2) suggests that under the court’s recommendation, the District Legal Services Authority or the State Legal Services Authority (depending upon the case) may decide the amount of compensation that has to be provided.
Sub-Section (3) states that as per the discretion of the court if the compensation is found unsatisfactory for the rehabilitation of the victim, or in case of discharge or acquittal of the accused, the court may still recommend the necessary compensation.
Sub-Section (4) further discusses the rights vested in the victims. It talks about cases where the alleged offender cannot be found or has absconded, but can be identified. In such a scenario, the victim can file a written application seeking compensation from the State or District Legal Services Authority.
Sub-Section (5) further talks about the proper functioning of rights mentioned in Sub-Section (4). It authorizes the State or District Legal Services Authority to approve sanction of compensation to the victim after the due inquiry has been conducted.
Lastly, Sub-Section (6) provides that the State or District Legal Services Authority must try and make medical treatment available to the victim free of cost provided the victim is successful in obtaining a certificate from a police offer ranked not less than the area’s magistrate.
Further Section 357B of the CrPC clarifies that this compensation mentioned in the predecessor section will be provided in addition to the compensation already provided under Section 326A and Section 326B of the IPC. Section 357C of the CrPC orders all hospitals, of any nature (local, public, private etc.,) to provide the victim with immediate emergency first-aid that is free of cost.
Important Case Laws
Lakshmi v. Union of India
Case Brief
Lakshmi v. Union of India (2015) is related to a girl, Lakshmi who was merely 16-years-old when she suffered from acid attack. The cause of this attack was a refusal to a marriage proposal. Lakshmi was courageous, and in 2006 she filed a PIL in the Supreme Court of India where apart from asking for compensation she also demanded the creation of new laws and amendment of any laws related to acid attacks in India. She asked for the complete ban on the sale of acids in the markets to commoners.
The Supreme Court ruled in her favour and ordered the governments at the centre and state level to formulate laws on the same upon proper deliberation and discussions. Seeing the non-compliance of governments on this matter, the Supreme Court took the matter in its own hands and formulated guidelines.
As per the guidelines, acid should strictly not be sold to anyone who is below the age of majority, i.e. 18 years. A photo identity proof was mandated for those who wanted to purchase acid.
Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India
Case brief
Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India (2015); Parivartan Kendra is the name of an NGO that exercised its right under Article 32 of the Constitution and filed a writ petition. The issue raised in this case was the deteriorating plight of acid attack victims despite the judgment passed in Lakshmi v. Union of India. The case was filed after the acid attack on an 18-year-old Dalit girl, who was initially sexually harassed and verbally tormented. When she was sleeping, the four people threw acid on her face. As she was sleeping with her sister, both of them suffered injuries. Medical treatment was delayed, and expenses were so high that the family was in debt. The NGO raised issues such as sufficiency of 3 lakhs rupees for victims, the need for medical efficiency for a faster recovery and additional medical incentives such as free check-ups, expenses of medicines etc.
The Court held that the government had failed to control the situation of acid attacks even after many regulations and funds were not being provided properly. Minimum 3 lakh rupees compensation was mandated. For the victim and her sister, 10 lakh rupees to the victim and an additional three to her sister were to be provided within three months.
Preeti Rathi Case
Case brief
The case law State of Maharashtra v. Ankur Panwar (2019) is related to a 23-year-old nurse who worked in a hospital in Mumbai. She was approached by the accused for marriage but she rejected him as she wanted to establish her career. He could not handle the rejection and threw acid on her while she was travelling by train. She accidentally swallowed a few drops and sustained fatal injuries. For a month she was admitted to a hospital, but she passed away.
It should be noted that this was a very special case and hence, heard by a Special Court headed by woman judge, Justice A.S. Shinde. She was shocked that the acid attack was so gruesome that it resulted in the death of the victim. At first, he was sentenced to death in accordance with Bangladesh’s very laudable Acid Crime Suspension Act. Later the death sentence was converted to life imprisonment along with payment of compensation to the parents’ of the victim.
Srimanthula Chinna Sathaiah and Anr. v. The State of A.P.
Case brief
Srimanthula Chinna case (1998) was filed when the enmity between two men rose to such an extent that one of them administered an acid attack against his wife. The accused in this case was suspicious that his wife was in an extra-marital affair with the victim’s son. To avenge this betrayal he threw acid on her which burned her face and caused her injuries.
The Court held up his conviction under Section 326A of IPC and he served a ten-year sentence with rigorous punishment.
Piyali Dutta v. State of West Bengal
Case brief
In the case law, Piyali Dutta v. The State of West Bengal,(2017) Piyali Dutta petitioned in the High Court as even after applying for compensation to the Chief Secretary after suffering an acid attack, she received no compensation. The West Bengal Legal Services Authority took the matter up and contested that provisions in the CrPC, as well as the IPC, was introduced post her acid attack in 2005 and hence, she should not be eligible for any compensation.
The High Court passed an order in her favour and asked the authority to pay compensation to her.
Conclusion
The success of any legislation is decided by its implementation. Acid attacks have been on the rise even after the introduction of stringent provisions in the IPC against it. Lakshmi Agarwal says, “People say inner beauty matters, but in reality, only a few people go beyond physical features.” This is rightly said. An acid attack survivor has to face all kinds of consequences. Physical consequences are not limited to disfiguration but also include other health complications caused by acid fumes. Socially these people face isolation, negative stares, taunts and other comments. The prospect of marriage becomes bleak. Due to disability, they are unable to work and have to depend on others. Even if they are not disabled, disfigurements prompt many to not give them a job. Psychologically, they suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and are likely to suffer from low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, the dearth of hope etc.
In my opinion, India should take inspiration from Bangladesh’s government and introduce similar acts like The Acid Control Act, 2002 and the Acid Crime Prevention Act, 2002. Some key features of these acts are:
- Restriction on import, export and sale of acids.
- Special Fund for victims known as Acid Attack Council Fund
- Quick and adequate medical treatment of victims.
- Establishment of Rehabilitation centres for victims.
These little changes will go a long way to pave a better life for the survivors of acid attack victims. Acid is a very easily available substance and that needs urgent regulation. As citizens, it is our collective duty to eradicate this social evil and end the stigma attached to this crime for the betterment of survivors. A specific regulation needs to be implemented in order to curb the number of acid attacks in India.
References
LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:
