12 ACID ATTACK PART-2

Smriti Kartikeya and Deeksha Dwivedi

Introduction

“Growing Challenge Before Women and Society”

“Legal Impact”

Victim Compensation Scheme

Name of State/UT	Name of Scheme	Year of Inceptio n of the Scheme	Amount of Compensation	Time Frame of Compensati on Fund Release	Others
Bihar	Bihar Victim Compensation Scheme	2011	– Loss of Life Rs. 1,00,000 -Injuries after an acid attack Rs. 25,000 -Loss of limb or injury causing severe mental agony to women and child victims Rs. 25,000 -Grievous Hurt as defined in section 320 of the IPC, 1860 Rs. 25,000	Within 2 months	Free immediate medical aid on recommendation of the Deputy Commissioner of District Legal Service Authority
Goa	Goa Victim Compensati on-on Scheme	2012	– In case of death of the sole earning member of the family where children are minors and/or unemployed up to Rs. 2,00,000 – In case of death of non-earning member up to Rs 25,000/- – Loss of any Limb or part of the body resulting in 80% disability including acidattack up to Rs. 50,000/- – Loss of any Limb or any part of body resulting in 40% and below 80% disability including acid attack up to Rs. 25,000/- – Loss of Limb or part of the body resulting in 40% disability including acid attack up to Rs. 10,000/- – In case of injury causing severe mental agony to women and children up to Rs 10,00,000/-attack up to Rs. 50,000/-– Loss of any Limb or any part of body resulting in 40% and below 80% disability including acid attack up to Rs. 25,000/- – Loss of Limb or part of the body resulting in 40% disability including acid attack up to Rs. 10,000/- – In case of injury causing severe mental agony to women and children up to Rs 10,00,000/-	Within 2 months from the date of filing the complaint	Immediate medical benefits to be made available free of cost
Gujarat	Gujarat Victim Compensati on Scheme	2013	– Loss of Life Rs. 1,50,000 – Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in 80% or above handicap Rs. 1,00,000 – Loss of any limb or part of body resulting above 40% and below 80% handicap Rs. 50,000 – Permanent disfigurement of head or face by acid (in case of acid attack on women) Rs. 1,00,000/- – Assault on women disfiguring her face or any part of body by acid or any other weapon Rs. 50,000/- – In case of injury causing severe mental agony to women and children Rs. 25,000/- – Rehabilitation Rs. 50,000/-	Within two months	Immediate firstaid facility or medical benefits to be made available free of cost.
Haryana	Haryana Victim Compensation-on Scheme	2013	– Loss of life Rs. 1- 3 lakhs– Loss of any limb or part of body (80%) including loss due to acid attack Rs. 50,000 to 2,00,000– Loss of any limb or part of body (50%) including loss due to acid attack Rs. 25,000 to 1,00,000	within two months	Immediate firstaid facility or medical benefits to be made available free of cost.
Himachal Pradesh	Himachal Pradesh (Victim of Crime) Compensati on Scheme	2012	– In case of death or disability equal to or more than 80% Rs. 1,00,000/-– In case of acid attack Rs. 50,000/-– In case of loss of limb etc. where the permanent disablement is equal to or more than 40% but less than 80% Rs. 50,000/-– In case of grievous hurt Rs 25,000/-	Within 60 days	Immediate interim aid facility or medical benefit to be made available free of cost
Jammu & Kashmir	Jammu & Kashmir Victim Compensati on Scheme	2013	– Loss of Life Rs. 2,00,000– Acid victims Rs. 2,00,000 to 3,00,000– Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in 40% and below 80% handicap Rs. 1,50,000– Injury causing severe mental agony to women and children Rs. 1,00,000	with in two months	Immediate first aid facility or medical benefits to be made available free of cost or any other interim relief as it may deem fit.
Manipur	Manipur Victim Compensati on-on Scheme	2011	– Loss of life Rs. 1,00,000– Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in 80% or above disability Rs. 50,000– Acid Attack Rs. 50,000– Rehabilitation Rs. 20,000– Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in below 40% disability Rs. 10,000– Loss or injury causing severe mental agony to women and child victims Rs. 10,000	with in two months
Meghalaya	Meghalaya Victim Compensati on-on Scheme	2011	– Loss or injury causing severe mental agony to women and child victims Rs. 25,000	with in 2 months	Immediate interim aid facility or medical benefit to be made available free of cost
Punjab	See “Haryana Victim Compensati on-on Scheme	2013	– Loss of life Rs. 1- 3 lakhs – Loss of any limb or part of body (80%) including loss due to acid attack Rs. 50,000 to 2,00,000 – Loss of any limb or part of body (50%) including loss due to acid attack Rs. 25,000 to 1,00,000	with in 2 months	Immediate firstaid facility or medical benefits to be made available free of cost.
Tamil Nadu	Tamil Nadu Victim Compensati on Scheme	2013	Loss of life (due to acid attack) up to Rs. 3,00,000– Loss of any limb or part of body (more than 80%) up to Rs. 2,00,000– Loss of any limb or part of body (More than 50%) up to Rs. 1,00,000– Loss or injury causing severe mental agony to women and children up to Rs. 1,00,000	within two months	State or the District Legal Service Authority shall ward an interim relief of Rs. 3,00,000 to the acid attack victim under subsection (6) of Section 357 (A) of the code, as the after-care and rehabilitation cost.
Tripura	Tripura Victim Compensati on-on Scheme	2012	– Loss of life up to Rs. 1,00,000 – Loss of limb or other permanent disability up to Rs. 75,000	with in two months	Immediate first aid facility or medical treatment to be made available free of cost.
Uttar Pradesh	Uttar Pradesh Victim Compensati on-on Scheme		– Acid Attack up to Rs. 3,00,000 – Severe trauma caused by physical disability Rs. 1,00,000
West Bengal	West Bengal Victim Compensati on-on Scheme	2012	– Loss of Life Rs. 2 Lakhs – Loss of limb or any part of the body resulting in above 80% handicap Rs. 50,000– Loss of limb or any part of the body resulting in above 40% and below 80% handicap Rs. 20,000 – Rehabilitation Rs. 20,000 – Loss of limb or any part of the body resulting in less than 40% handicap Rs. 10,000 – Loss or injury to child victims Rs. 10,000	with in six months	Immediate first aid facility or medical treatment to be made available free of cost
Union Territory
Delhi NCT	Delhi Victim Compensati on-on Scheme	2011	– Loss of life Rs. 3 to 5 lakhs- Victims of Acid Attack Rs. 50,000 to 3,00,000- Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in 80% permanent disability or above Rs. 2 to 3 lakhs.- Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in above 40% and below 80% permanent disability Rs. 1,00,000 to 1,50,000- Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in above 20% and below 40% permanent disability Rs. 60,000 to 1,00,000- Loss of any limb or part of body resulting in below 20% permanent disability Rs. 50,000- Rehabilitation Rs. 20,000	-75% of the compensatio n shall be put in a fixed deposit for a minimum period of 3 years and the remaining25 % shall be available for utilization and initial expenses by the victim. In the case of a minor, 80% of the amount of compensatio n-n so awarded, shall be deposited in the fixed deposit account and shall be drawn only on attainment of the age of majority, but not before three years of the deposit	Immediate firstaid facility or medical benefits or any other interim relief, as deemed appropriate, to be made available free of cost.

Brief of the Important Cases of Supreme Court and High Courts

Laxmi, an acid attack survivor from New Delhi, filed this PIL in the Supreme Court to control the sale of acid, to ensure compensation for survivors, and to guarantee access to medical care for survivors. The PIL has resulted in several groundbreaking orders regulating the sale of acid and setting minimum compensation for survivors. The petition also inspired a comprehensive Law Commission of India report, “The Inclusion of Acid Attacks as Specific Offences in the Indian Penal Code and a law for Compensation for Victims of Crime.” All activists working on acid violence should study this report and the proceedings in this case.

Facts of the Case

A young girl with big dreams, chirpy, confident, beautiful, is walking to her workplace from her home, which is a mile away. As she reaches halfway, she hears her name being called out, and turns to see who the caller is. She sees two people on a motorbike and walks towards them. The girl on the pillion is familiar and the man riding the bike is known to her. He wanted to marry her and she had declined. As she reaches them, the girl hurls some liquid on her. She experiences excruciating pain, a burning sensation and falls on the street. She had experienced a gruesome acid attack. Her face, her chest and arms were burnt beyond recognition and she was in tremendous pain. It has taken many painful corrective surgeries for her to partially heal and she will never look the same again. This is Laxmi.

A criminal case of attempt to murder was registered and those two persons on the bike have been convicted by a Court in Delhi. When the man went in appeal, to the Delhi High Court, the High Court ordered that she should be ordered a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs which has now been paid to her.

The battle with the law was anything but smooth. While Laxmi had the support both legally and financially throughout her battle, the way the case panned out drew one’s attention to the glaring deficiencies in the law. The first shock came when Naheem Khan, who was one of the main persons involved in the attack, easily got bail from the Court. It was then that it became clear that as long as an acid attack is not classified as a separate offence, persons attacking with acid would easily take bail as the judge hearing the application for bail would not be aware of the gruesome nature of the crime. The easy availability of acid and the huge costs associated with the corrective surgeries that become necessary are other huge problems that a victim faces. In 2006, Laxmi, with the help of her parents, her father’s employer Shireen Jeejeebhoy (who has fully paid for the treatment) and her lawyer filed a petition in the Supreme Court of India.

Writ Petition (Crl.) No(s). 129 of 2006

Laxmi (Minor) Thr. Her father — petitioner(s)

Versus

Union of India & Ors – Respondent(s)

Order of the Court

The petitioner’s counsel submitted that to combat acid attacks the Government of Bangladesh has introduced a specific provision in the IPC (sec. 326A) relating to acid attacks apart from framing an Acid (Control) Order to regulate and restrict the sale of acid. She stated that it has also formulated a scheme for treatment and rehabilitation. She may make available the said material to the Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India. We are informed that the National Commission of Women and Law Commission of India are in the process of preparing proposal schemes/ drafts legislatio n to save innocents from acid attacks.

Learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that the Government of India would look into several aspects of the problem, consider the suggestion and formulate procedures to curtail and regulate the sale of acid/ corrosive substances across the country. He also submitted that the feasibility of making appropriate amendments to existing laws will be considered.

11th February 2011 (Ordering the Union of India to develop schemes for survivors, to limit the sale of acid, and to give effect to Section 357 of the IPC):

Order of the Court

One of the prayers in this writ petition is to issue a direction to the respondents to make appropriate amendment in the India Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code for dealing with acid attacks. A direction to frame, in regard to prosecutions of acid throwers, and rehabilitation of acid attack victims (by providing proper treatment, after-care and rehabilitation of victims of acid attacks).

The Union of India, Law Commission of India and the National Commission for Women were the three respondents in the writ petition. On 30.10.2009, notices were issued to six States namely, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana and NCR of Delhi, where there are a considerable number of acid attacks.

During the pendency of this writ petition, the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been amended and Section 357A has been inserted by Act 5 of 2009 which requires every State Government, in coordination with the Central government, to prepare a scheme for providing funds for the purpose of compensation to the victims or their dependants who have suffered loss or injury. Though the said section has come into effect on 31.12.2009 and more than a year has elapsed, we are informed that no schemes have been formulated by any of the State Governments.

In these circumstances, we issue the following directions:

Let notice be issued to other remaining States and Union Territories.
The State Governments, in co-ordination with the Central Government shall prepare a scheme as provided in Section 357A for the purpose of providing compensation to victims of crimes, in particular, acid attack victims.
The Home Ministry, Government of India shall coordinate with the States/ U.Ts to give effect to Section 357A, in particular, with reference to acid attack victims.
As one of the matters of concern in regard to acid attacks is the free availability of acids, the Central Government and Staff Governments may also consider making appropriate provision for regulation of sale of acids so that it is not easily or readily available to offenders.

31 August 2012 (Order to the Secretary of Home Affairs to meet with Chief Secretaries of States to regulate the sale of acid):

Order of the Court

On behalf of Union of India, an affidavit has been filed by Shri J.L. Chugh, Joint Secretary (Judicial) in Ministry of Home Affairs.

i. In the above affidavit, it is stated that Criminal Law Amendment Bill, 2012 has bee n approved by the

Cabinet on July 19, 2012 which has the proposal for insertion of Section 326A and 326B in the Indian Penal

Code for making the acid attack a specific offence.

ii. Mr. Mohan Parasaran, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India submits that

since the present Parliament Session shall expire on September 7, 2012, it is unlikely that the above bill is

introduced in the Parliament in this Session. However, he submits that the above Bill will be introduced in

the Parliament in the ensuing Winter Session.

iii. Ms. Aparna Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioner is satisfied with the above statement of the learned A

dditional Solicitor General.

iv. In the order dated February 11, 2011, this Court, inter alia, observed that as one of the matters of concern

in regard to acid attacks is the free availability of acids, the Central Government and State Governments may

also consider making appropriate provision for regulation of the sale of acid so that it is not easily or readily

available to offenders.

v. Mr. Mohan Parasaran submits that regulation of the sale of acid is a State Subject and appropriate

provisions for regulation of sale of acid have to be made by the State Governments. He, however, submits

that the Ministry of Home Affairs shall convene a meeting of the Chief Secretaries/ concerned Secretaries of

the State Governments and the Administrators of the Union Territories for evolving a consensus in regard to

the regulation of sale of acid in the States/ Union Territories.

vi. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the Notification issued by the State of Sikkim

amending Sikkim Trade License and Miscellaneous Provision Rules, 2011 by inserting sub-rule 17A in said

Rules.

vii. In our view, the suggestion of Mr. Mohan Parasaran, learned Additional Solicitor General appears to be

proper.

viii. Let the Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India convene a meeting of the Chief

Secretaries / concerned Secretaries of the State Governments and the Administrators of the Union

Territories to discuss the enactment of the appropriate provision for effective regulation of sale of acid in

the States/ Union Territories.

ix. Let the matter come up for consideration on November 9, 2012.

x. In the meanwhile, the Chief Secretaries of the States of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,

Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Goa, Punjab, Gujarat, Jammu &

Kashmir, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Kerala, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand and Administrators of

Union Territories of Dadra, Nagar Haveli, Andaman & Nicobar and Chandigarh shall ensure that the

responses/affidavits of compliance are filed on behalf of the respective State Governments/ Union

Territories within eight weeks from today.

International Law:

Comparative Law

Acid Attacks have been reported in every region of the world, with particularly high incidence in South Asia and in South Asian communities. Most states punish acid violence under the existing norms prescribed for violent crime or gender-based crime (e.g., attempted murder, assault, domestic violence.)

Afghanistan

In Afghanistan, perpetrators of acid violence target women and girls who dress “immodestly” or fail to wear the hijab1. Religious extremists have also used acid as a weapo n to terrorize girls who attend school. Afghanistan’s elimination of violence against Women law (EVAW 2009) specifically criminalizes acid attacks and includes a 10-year life sentence for convicted attackers. Implementation of the EVAW has stalled and in 2013 the United Nations found that “Afghan authorities need to do more to build on the gains made so far in implementing the EVAW law”

Pakistan

A large percentage of acid attacks in Pakistan occur in the context of domestic violence between married couples or when women and girls have “shamed” their families. The Lower House of Parliament unanimously passed the 2011 Acid Throwing Crime Bill, which includes a sentence of 14 years to life and prison and a fine of 1 core Pakistani Rupees. Under the new law, the conviction rate has increased from 6 percent to 18 percent. In addition to the Bill, the Supreme Court of Pakistan has been a strong force in combating acid attacks and ensuring justice. At the same time, critics have noted that the Bill does not ensure compe nsation to survivors and the patriarchal2 attitudes prevalent in the police force and Judiciary creates barriers to ensuring justice for survivors.

Uganda

Perpetrators of acid violence in African countries target both men and women. In Uganda, for example, women comprise 57 percent of acid attack victims. The primary reported reasons for attacks – “relationship conflicts” – mirror the Asian context. Property and business disputes also motivate acid violence in Uganda. A number of laws including the National Environment Act, the Control of Agricultural Chemicals Act, No. 1 of 2007, and the East African Community Customs Management Act No. 1 of 2005 regulate the sale of acid and chemicals in Uganda.

Cambodia

In Cambodia, men comprise about 50 percent of acid attack survivors. In December 2011, Cambodia enacted The Law on Regulation of Concentrated Acid, which includes the maximum sentence of 30 years. The Acid Attack Law limits the sale of acid, but like other laws on acid violence, Cambodia’s Acid Attack Law fails to provide adequate guarantees for medical or rehabilitative services for survivors. Cambodia sentenced the first person under the law in January 2013- 2 years after enacting the law- illustrating the need of greater implementation and state action. Moreover, the limits on the sale/transport of acid have not been finalized and activists have called for ensuring the sub-decree on the sale and transportation of acid. The Cambodian Acid Survivors Charity (CASC) Reports that a litre of battery acid still sells for Rs. 50 on the streets. Finally, while the Acid Attack Law, includes measures for free medical treatment at Government health facilities and free Legal Assistance of State, Acid Attack Survivors have not yet benefitted from these guarantees. Even with the shortcomings in the law, CASC Reports a “60 percent drop in the number of acid burn cases (from 25 cases in 2011 to only 15 cases in 2012),” showing the impact of strong acid violence legislation.

Bangladesh:

Bangladesh consistently reports the highest incidence of acid attacks in the world. Acid violence in Bangladesh disproportionally impacts women, who comprise 82 present of survivors and victims’. Like in India, most perpetrators in Bangladesh attack women as a result of refused marriage proposals or sexual advances. In 2002, the government of Bangladesh enacted two laws to curb acid violence, the Acid Crime Control Act and Acid Crime Prevention Act. These laws represent the most comprehensive legislative action on acid attacks in the world. Both laws leave room for improvement and stronger implementation, but acid violence has decreased steadily in Bangladesh since the passage of these laws.

The Acid Crime Prevention Act (ACA) primarily governs the sale, transport, storage, and disposal of acid. At the national and district level, it establishes councils to ensure implementation of the Act. The mandated3 members of the National Council is comprised of representatives from the Home Ministry, Ministry of Women and Children Affairs, Industry Ministry, Ministry of Commerce, Health Ministry, Women members of Parliament, the President of the Federation of Bangladesh Chamber of Commerce and Industries, a chemistry professor, experts, and representatives from NGOs. The National Acid Control Council’s specific duties include:

(a) To make recommendations for formulating policy for controlling of production, transportation, storing,

selling and use of Acid and controlling the import of the same.

(b) To formulate necessary policy-with a view to preventing the possible damaging reaction and misuse of

acid and for taking action for implementation of the same.

of acid attacks and to take steps for the implementation of the same.

(d) To take up necessary educational; and publicity programmes for making the public aware of the negative

and devastating effect of misuse of acid.

(e) To conduct any research or survey to collect information regarding use and abuse of action.

(f) To maintain contact with all Ministers and organizations, relating to acid attacks and to coordinate all

activities relating to the same.

(g) To formulate policy for the efficient management of effluents4 for the prevention of possible damage

caused by acid or acid mixture discharged as effluent by industrial units in the process of production, and to

take steps for the implementation and supervision of the same.

(h) To take all such necessary steps for the execution of the aforesaid duties and responsibilities.

Before 2002, the Government would regularly take ten years to prosecute in an acid attack case. Today, the Acid Crime Control Act (ACCA) provides that all investigations must be completed by the “concerned Police Officer within 30 days.” Special Acid Crime Tribunals5 at the district level must complete all cases within 90 days from the date of receipt of the case. The ACCA provides severe sentences based on the body part injured in the attack. An acid injury to the face, breasts, or reproductive organs call for a life sentence or the death penalty and a fine of about Indian Rs. 60,000,

International Law

Article 51 of the Constitution of India provides: “The state shall endeavor to (a) promote international peace and security… (c) To foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organized people with one another.” The Supreme Court has relied on Article 51 when affirming India’s obligations under international human rights conventions and treaties. In Vishakha vs. State of Rajasthan, the Supreme Court held, “It is now an accepted rule of judicial construction that regard must be had to international conventions and norms constructing domestic law when there is no inconsistency between them and there is a void in the domestic law.”

The most useful human rights conventions and treaties for activists, advocates, and survivors working on acid attacks are:

ICCPR: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by India in 1968.
ICESCR: International Covenant on Economic, Cultural, and Social Rights, ratified by India in 1968.
CEDAW: Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women, ratified by India in 1993.

Specific facts in each case may also invoke the fundamental rights protections enshrined in the following conventions:

CERD: Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, ratified by India in 1968.
CRC: Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by India in 1992.

Finally, an acid attack survivor’s injuries may result in a disability and trigger the protections in the:

CRPD: Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ratified by India in 2007.

These human rights conventions provide wide protections and guarantees across a spectrum of fundamental rights. This section briefly outlines treaty provisions that obligate the government of India to take immediate steps to eliminate acid attacks and to ensure justice for survivors.

The Constitution and Statutory Provisions

Article 14:

The State s ha ll not de ny to a ny perso n eq ua lity be fore the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Article 14 is not mere formal equality, it also encompasses substantive equality. This means that equality cannot simply exist on paper. The State has to take positive action, including taking special measures to ensure equality. As women in India are disproportionately the victims of acid attacks, and acid attacks largely constitute gendered violence6 , women require special protection from acid violence under the law.

Article 21: No person s ha ll be depr ived o f his life or per so na l liber ty e xcept accord ing to proced ur e estab lis hed b y law.

The S up re me Court in cate na o f jud gme nts (F ra nc is Cora lie M ullin vs. Unio n Ter r ito r y o f De lhi & O rs [1981SCR (2)516] ) has reco gnised tha t the r ight to life inc lude s the r ight to be free fro m inhuma n a nd de grad ing trea tme nt.

Section 320 – Grie vous Hurt: Ac id Atta cks a re co ns idered “gr ie vo us hurt” as any permanent disfigurement, disability, or destruction of a body part is included in this section.

Section 325: The punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt is a maximum of seven years. No minimum punishment is prescribed.

Section 326: Volunta r ily ca us ing gr ie vo us hurt thro ugh a da ngero us weapo n or a nothe r mea ns : A “cor ros ive s ub sta nce ” is spec if ied as be ing a “d a ngero us mea ns ”, he nc e ac id attacks will b e co vered. The P unis hme nt under this Sectio n is fo r a ma ximu m p er iod o f life impr iso nme nt, or a per iod up to 10 yea rs. There is no minimum p unis hme nt pres cr ibed.

The Criminal Law (Amendment ) Act , 2013, made the following Changes:

Section 100: When the right to private defense of the body extends to causing death: An act of throwing acid or administering acid, or an attempt to throw or administer acid which reasonably causes the apprehension that grievous hurt will be the consequence of such an attack. Thus acid attacks have been included under the list of grievous crimes under which the right to private defense extends to causing death. This means that an acid attack is so grave that a survivor may be justified in killing the perpetrator to defend herself from the attack.

Section 326A: Whoever causes permanent or partial damage, deformity, burns, maims, disfigures or disables any part of parts of the body of a person with the intention or knowing that it is likely to cause such injury or hurt, shall be punished with either simple or rigorous imprisonment for a term of at least 10 years, which may extend to imprisonment for life, and a fine. The fine shall be paid to the victim, and shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses of the victim.

Section 326B: Attempting to throw or administer acid with the intention of causing permanent or partial damage, deformity, burns, maim, disfigure, disable, grievous hurt shall be imprisoned with either simple or rigorous imprisonment for at least five years, up to seve n years, and a fine. Acid includes any substances of acidic, corrosive or burning character that is capable of causing bodily injury which leads to scars, disfigurement, temporary or permanent disability. For the purpose of both these sections, the damage or deformity need not have to be irreversible.

Section 166A: A public servant who refuses to record any information in relation to an offence under Section 326 A and 326 B (as well as some other sections), shall be imprisoned with rigorous imprisonment fo r a term of at mleast six months which may extend up to two years, and be liable to pay a Fine.

Section 166B: Whoever is in charge of any hospital, whether public or private, run by the Central or S tate Government, a local body, or any person, and who contravenes Section 357A of the Code of Criminal P rocedure, shall be imprisoned for a term which may extend up to one year, or with fine, or both. Section 357A governs payment of fines to victims of crimes

The Code of Criminal Procedure was similarly amended by the same Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013:

Section 154 : When the information is given by the woman victim of acrime under Sec tio n 326 A, 326B whic hare the sections dealing with ac id attacks (and other sections o f the IPC), the info r ma tio n will be r ecorded by a wo man police officer or a ny woman officer.

Section 154 (a): Pro vides for special provisions for survivors of offences under Sectio n 3 54, 354A, 354 B, 354C, 376, 376A, 376 B, 376C, 376D, 376 E or

Section 509 of the IPC (sexual harassment, criminal force to a woman with intent to disrobe, watching a woman in a private act, stalking, rape, and aggra vated rape). When an offence under the Section has been committed and the victim has been per manently or tmporarily mentally or phys ica lly disab led, t he n the police o fficer shall, in the presence of an special educator or inte rpreter, record information from the victim at the victim’ s res ide nce o f any p lace o f the victim’ s choosing. The record ing o f s uc h infor matio n ma y be vid eo grap hed if needed /

Section 154 (a ) seems to have over looked acid attack victims as Section 326A and 326 B ha ve not be e n inc luded. This might be particularly problematic as in most cases acid attack victims suffer from significant physical disability following the attack.

Important ongoing Acid Attack Cases of Allahabad High Court

Case Name	Facts of the Cases & Order passed by the Court
Public Interest Litigation No. 68901 of 2013, Ayushi Dubey & others Vs. State of U.P. & others.	This is a case of an acid attack on a poor girl of District Jaunpur, in which the HRLN( Human Rights Law Network) law interns played a historic role. A news report had been published about the acid attack in village Machli Gaon, SubDivision Badlapur, Distirct Jaunpur on 9th November, 2013 in a Hindi daily Dainik Jagran and an English daily Pioneer. On the basis of the news report, a Fact Finding Team consisting of 10 law students was constituted and it was decided that the team would visit the village, and as per the decision, the law interns went to the village on 20.11.2013 and met the survivor, her family members and villagers. The law interns also visited Varanasi on 21.11.2013 and went to the nursing home in Babatpur area of Varanasi where the girl was initially admitted. It was found that the survivor was subjected to this cruelty by a school teacher of that very village, who had been coercing and pressurizing her for marriage. Once, when the survivor was going outside the village, the school teacher caught hold of her hand and tried to mo lest her, the girl protested and slapped him when the teacher threatened her of dire consequences. On the night of 7/8th November, 2013 at around 12.00 a.m. at midnight one Vimal Maurya threw acid on the victim girl and her mother. They both were taken to the local Primary Health Centre who referred them to the District Hospital and the District Hospital advised them to go for better treatment to Varanasi. Then they both went to Varanasi and were admitted to a Pragya nursing Home for several days. The survivors belonged to a very poor family and they took take loan for better treatment. Later, they left the nursing home as they had no money to continue the treatment. A Public Interest Litigation was filed, in which the interns appeared in person to argue the case before the division bench of Chief Justice Dhananjaya Yashwant Chandrachud and Justice Sanjay Mishra J., who passed a very impressive order, of which the relevant portion of the judgment is quoted in this report : “At the initial stage, steps must be taken to ensure that due medical care is provided to the victim and to her mother. For this purpose, we direct the Chief Medical Officer, Jaunpur who is the sixth Respondent to constitute a medical team of doctors and experts to examine the condition of the victim and her mother and to make an assessment of what steps are required to be taken to ensure their treatment and rehabilitation. We direct that all the necessary measures shall be taken forthwith at the cost and expense of the State. From the report of the students, it is clear that the family is in indigent circumstances and is unable to meet the expenses of medical care. The sixth Respondent shall take necessary steps to provide due treatment and shall ensure that an ambulance is made available to transport the victim and her mother from their place of residence to the concerned hospital and for their due examination. A medical report shall be prepared and should be placed before this Court on 6^th January, 2014. However, we direct that the sixth Respondent shall not wait for further directions of the court and shall, subject to the consent of the victim and her family, take necessary steps to provide rehabilitation and other medical treatment as required in the interest of the victim and her mother. The court has been informed by the learned Standing Counsel that a First Information Report was registered in the present case and a charge-sheet has been submitted to the competent court. The court should be appraised, on the next date of hearing, of the further progress in the matter. We direct the District Judge, Jaunpur to monitor the progress in the matter and to submit his report before the Court on the status of the case by the next date of hearing. A copy of this order shall be made available by the Registrar General of this court to the District Judge, Jaunpur by facsimile immediately. We also direct the State Government to inform the court as to whether it has framed any scheme in accordance with the provisions of Section 357A of the Cr.P.C. If a scheme is not framed till date, the State Government shall ensure that a scheme is framed at an early date. We also direct that the District Magistrate, Jaunpur (Respondent No. 4) shall collect, through a responsible officer, copies of the medical bills in respect of the line of treatment which has been administered to the victim and her mother, by their family. Before the next date of hearing, the fourth Respondent sha ll, after due consideration of the expenses which has been incurred, take a final decision in regard to the reimbursement of the expenses and payment shall be made immediately without waiting for further directions of the court. The matter shall stand over for further hearing.
Public Interest Litigation No. 23317 of 2013, “Chirag Sahyog Sansthan Vs. Union of India & others”	This is a Public Interest Litigation on the problem of acid attack on the women in Uttar Pradesh. The Petitioner is an Assistant Professor in Allahabad University in the Department of Commerce and runs the organization ‘Chirag Sahyog Sansthan’. The Petitioner took the question of four sisters of District Shamli who were victims of the acid attack, and there are other several cases of acid attacks in U.P. It was also placed by the Petitioner that in the case of acid attacks, only the charges of grievous hurt including Section 329, 322 and 325 are used. It was also raised by the Petitioner that there were no restrictions on the sale of acid and it is available in the open market at a cheap rate. The Petitioner’s organization raised the question of classifying the acid attack as a separate offence, with a harsher punishment, as it creates disfigurement and disability to the survivors. The Petitioner dealt with the various recommendations given by the Law Commission and National Women’s Commission in the matter. The Writ Petition was heard by the division bench of Hon’ble Chief Justice Shiv Kirti Singh and Justice Dilip Gupta who granted Union of India and State of U.P. four weeks’ time to make available to this court the response of the two governments in this matter. It also directed the Union of India and the State Government to think about the issue and suggest measures to prevent the recurring incidents of acid throwing on women by curbing the supply or availability of acid in the open market as it is available without any control.
Public Interest Litigation No. 28874 of 2014, “Anshika Singh & others Vs. Union of India & others”	This Public Interest Litigation is based on an investigation conducted by the students under the internship of the Human Rights Law Network. The students responded to the newspaper reports which appeared on 03.05.2014 in a leading newspaper, Hindustan, highlighting a case of an acid attack in the area of Allahabad district. Shushila bore the brunt of the acid attack which took place allegedly at 2.30 a.m. on 02.05.2014 and succumbed to her injuries at 4.00 p.m. after being admitted to the Burn Ward of S.R.N. Hospital, Allahabad. The victim of 27 years of age had received 50-60% burn injuries. The sister of the victim and a three year old son of the victim who were present in the house also received burn injuries. The sister of the victim namely Sheela tried to resist the attacker and was also injured. On 04.05.2014, a fact finding team of law students visited the village and recorded the statement of the family members of the deceased acid attack victim and other persons and prepared a report. The victims are poor and not in a position to bear the expensive cost of treatment. The Public Interest Litigation was heard by Hon’ble Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Dilip Gupta on 23.05.2014. The Court directed with an exhaustive order to the State that before the court proceed to issue a final direction in regard to the plea of compensation, it would be appropriate if the sister of the victim and the young infant are medically examined at the SRN Hospital, Allahabad. The Chief Medical Superintendent of SRN Hospital, Allahabad is directed to refer the two patients to the burn ward for medical examination and direct the District Magistrate, Allahabad to issue appropriate direction for the provision of transport facility to the two patients from their place of residence to SRN Hospital and for return. The report of the medical examination shall be placed before this Court in a sealed cover by the learned Standing Counsel on the next date of hearing on 29th May, 2014. Then the matter was put before on 29th May, 2014 in which the Hon’ble Court again directed the State Government that all the expenses of the treatment shall be borne by the State Government and the compensation will be decided in the next date of hearing.

CONCLUSION

The cumulative conclusion and the entire picture that emerges is that a drastic initiative is required to combat the growing menace of acid attacks, which is a heinous tool of the worst kind in a chauvinistic society, where ideas and actions are controlled by patriarchal mindsets. It is the need of the hour that the following measures may be suggested to the legislature and the administration to reduce, restrict and curb these gender- based attacks. It is required that, special tribunals be created , which may function as special courts for the expeditious and speedy disposal of the a cid attack cases. It is needed that a required amendment be made so that, the Judges hearing the acid attack matters should preferably be women and should be specially trained and sensitized.

That a special public prosecutor be appointed to assist the prosecution to render justice to the victim.

A special contingency fund and corpus be created to help the family of the acid victim who dies, as well as the survivors.

It should be suggested that, a suitable amendment be made in the legislation to insure that bail is not granted to the offenders thus, making the provisions more stringent.

That the legislature is pressurized to bring an amendment that anticipatory bail should not be granted to the acid offenders even if the provisions of the anticipatory bail are introduced by the State Legislature.

Sr. No.	Word	Meaning
A.	Indian Evidence Act	This Act may be called the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It extends to the whole of India [Except the State of Jammu and Kashmir] and applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courtsmartial, [other than Courts-martial convened under the Army Act.,] (44 & 45 Vict., c.58) [the Naval Discipline Act (29 & 30 Vict., c 109) or the Indian Navy (Discipline) Act. 1934] (34 of 1934) [or the Air Force Act] 7 Geo. 5, c. 51) but not to affidavits presented to any Court to any Court or Officer, not to proceedings before an arbitrator And it shall come into force on the first day of September, 1872.

you can view video on ACID ATTACK PART-2

References:

Justice J.S. Verma, Justice Leila Seth & Gopal Subramanium, Report of the Committee on Amendme nts to Criminal Law 471-476 (2013)
Law Commission of India, The Inclusion of Acid Attacks, 8.
Law Commission of India, The Inclusion of Acid Attacks, 13
High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, State of Karnataka vs. Joseph Rodrigues (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1065, 1066, and 1239/2004) (final judgment, 2006)
NCW, Annual Report 2008-2009, Annexure IV. On 29 January 2009, the NCW issued a revised version of the Sche me, which is the version analyzed here.1995 SCC (1) 14, JT 1994 (7) 183 (19 Oct. 1994), available at http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1765970/
Acid Crime Prevention Act (17 March 2002), Chapter II (4) (ii)
Vishaka and others v. State of Rajasthan and others (1997) 6 SCC 241, AIR 1997; see also Apparel Export Promotion Council vs. Chopra (1999) 625 SC 634, AIR 1999
Parivartan Kendra vs. Union of India & Others (WP (C) 876/2013 ), Supreme Court of India.
CEDAW Committee, General Recommendation No. 19, Violence against Women (1992), para. 1, available at http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/recommendatios/recomm.htm.
ICESCR, Article 13
ICESCR, Article 6
CEDAW, Article 10
CEDAW, Article 11
CERD, Article 1.
Aarti Thakur vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. WP (2014)
National Commission for Women, Annual Report (Delhi 2008-2009): 31.

About the Author:

Smriti Kartikeya, Law Graduate from Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, enrolled in the Bar Council in 2013, practicing Lawyer in Allahabad High Court, fellow of Bertha Foundation, State Coordinator, and Human Rights Law Network, awarded by the Uttar Pradesh Government on “Nari Siksha Nari Suraksha” in 2014 in collaboration with Hindustan Newspaper.

Deeksha Dwivedi, 4th Year Law Student, Allahabad University, actively involved in Human Rights Law Network, awarded by the Uttar Pradesh Government on “Nari Siksha Nari Suraksha” in 2014 in collaboration with Hindustan Newspaper, worked with the State Commission for the Rights of the Children of Delhi State, scholarship-holder under Bertha Foundation.