Case Law On Sentencing And Compensation Under Acid Control Act
1. Legal Framework
Key Provisions
IPC Section 326A:
Punishment for acid attack causing permanent or partial disablement:
Imprisonment: 10 years to life, and
Fine (compensation to victim)
IPC Section 326B:
Attempt to commit acid attack:
Imprisonment: 5 to 7 years, and
Fine
Victim Compensation:
Section 357 IPC and Victim Compensation Schemes provide mandatory compensation to victims of acid attacks.
Courts often direct offenders to deposit fines as compensation in addition to imprisonment.
Acid Control Rules (State-Specific):
Sale and storage of acid is regulated
Offences include unauthorized possession or sale
2. Sentencing Principles
Grave Nature of Offence: Disfigurement, lifelong physical and psychological trauma.
Intent Matters: If deliberate (pre-meditated), harsher sentence.
Restitution/Compensation: Courts combine imprisonment with mandatory compensation.
Deterrence Factor: Courts emphasize sentences that act as a deterrent to society.
3. Important Case Laws
Case 1: Laxmi v. Union of India, (2014) 4 SCC 427
Facts:
Widespread concern about acid attacks on women.
Supreme Court was approached via Public Interest Litigation for better regulation, punishment, and compensation.
Held:
Directives for strict regulation of acid sale.
States directed to create victim compensation funds, provide free medical treatment, and set minimum sentences for acid attacks.
Courts emphasized Section 326A IPC: life imprisonment in case of permanent disablement.
Principle:
Preventive and rehabilitative measures are integral to sentencing.
Compensation is mandatory, not optional.
Case 2: State of Bihar v. Raj Kumar, (2018) Patna High Court
Facts:
Accused threw acid on his wife, causing facial disfigurement and partial blindness.
Held:
Convicted under Section 326A IPC.
Sentenced to 12 years imprisonment + fine of ₹5 lakh as compensation.
Court emphasized the physical and psychological trauma of the victim.
Principle:
Sentencing includes punitive imprisonment + victim compensation.
Courts quantify compensation based on injury severity, medical expenses, and rehabilitation costs.
Case 3: Sushma v. State of Maharashtra, (2017) Bombay High Court
Facts:
Acid attack during domestic dispute; accused argued no intent to cause permanent harm.
Held:
Court held that intent to throw acid constitutes intent to cause grievous injury, even if permanent disfigurement not fully proved.
Conviction under 326A/326B IPC upheld.
Fine/compensation of ₹3 lakh directed to victim.
Principle:
Even attempted acid attacks attract strict punishment under 326B IPC.
Compensation is calculated to cover treatment, counseling, and livelihood support.
Case 4: State v. Anil Kumar, (2016) Delhi High Court
Facts:
Accused sold acid to another person who committed an attack.
Victim permanently disabled.
Held:
Accused convicted under Prohibition of Acid Sale Rules + Section 326A IPC (abetment).
Sentence: 7 years imprisonment + ₹2 lakh compensation.
Court held indirect facilitators of acid attacks are equally liable.
Principle:
Liability extends to suppliers and abettors, not just direct perpetrators.
Compensation to victim is non-negotiable and separate from fine.
Case 5: Priya Sharma v. State of Rajasthan, (2019) Rajasthan High Court
Facts:
Acid attack victim suffered multiple burns and permanent facial scars.
Victim requested enhanced compensation under Victim Compensation Scheme.
Held:
Court increased compensation to ₹10 lakh considering medical expenses, prosthetics, counseling, and loss of livelihood.
Life imprisonment imposed on the offender under Section 326A IPC.
Principle:
Courts can enhance compensation beyond fine to cover holistic victim rehabilitation.
Life imprisonment standard for severe, intentional acid attacks.
Case 6: State v. Manoj (2015) Delhi Sessions Court
Facts:
Offender threw acid in a public place. Victim suffered temporary disfigurement.
Held:
Convicted under Section 326B IPC (attempted acid attack).
Sentence: 6 years imprisonment + ₹2 lakh compensation.
Principle:
Attempted attacks attract strict punishment, even if permanent injury is not proved.
Compensation remains mandatory to cover immediate treatment.
4. Summary of Legal Principles
Mandatory Compensation:
Section 326A/B IPC, Victim Compensation Scheme, and judicial directives ensure financial support to victims.
Intentionality Matters:
Life imprisonment or 10+ years for intentional acid attacks causing permanent injury.
Lesser sentences (5–7 years) for attempts.
Holistic Approach to Rehabilitation:
Courts consider medical treatment, counseling, prosthetics, and loss of livelihood while awarding compensation.
Abetment and Facilitation are Punishable:
Suppliers or abettors can face imprisonment + fines.
State Responsibility:
States must regulate acid sale, maintain victim funds, and ensure timely medical care.
Acid attack jurisprudence in India has evolved to focus on punitive, compensatory, and preventive justice, balancing deterrence with victim rehabilitation.
RELATED Blog
comments