Criminal Liability For Acid Attacks In Domestic, Workplace, And Public Environments

11 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

🔹 1. Introduction: Understanding Acid Attacks

Acid attacks involve the deliberate throwing or administering of acid or corrosive substances on another person, intending to disfigure, maim, or cause severe bodily harm. These attacks often result in:

Permanent disfigurement and disability

Psychological trauma

Social and economic marginalization

Such crimes are treated as heinous offenses and attract serious criminal liability under laws dealing with attempt to murder, grievous hurt, and gender-based violence.

🔹 2. Legal Framework (Focusing on India as Example)

After landmark judicial directions and public outcry, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 introduced Sections 326A and 326B into the Indian Penal Code (IPC):

Section 326A IPC – Punishes voluntarily causing grievous hurt by acid, with imprisonment not less than 10 years (up to life) and fine sufficient to meet the medical expenses of the victim.

Section 326B IPC – Punishes attempt to throw or administer acid, with imprisonment not less than 5 years (up to 7 years) and fine.

Additionally:

CrPC Section 357A – Provides compensation to victims.

Poison and Acid Control Rules – Regulate the sale and storage of acid.

🔹 3. Criminal Liability in Different Contexts

(a) Domestic Environment

Often arises out of domestic disputes, dowry issues, or rejection of marriage proposals.

Liability may extend to husband, in-laws, or relatives under Sections 326A, 498A, and 307 IPC.

Courts emphasize the heinous and gendered nature of such violence.

(b) Workplace Environment

Acid attacks at the workplace may occur due to professional jealousy, harassment, or retaliation against female employees.

Employers may face vicarious liability if safety mechanisms or preventive steps were absent.

The attacker's liability remains criminal and individual, but organizational negligence can attract civil and administrative sanctions.

(c) Public Environment

These attacks often occur in public spaces, motivated by revenge, rejection, or random violence.

Criminal liability is purely personal, and the offender is charged under 326A IPC, often combined with Section 307 (attempt to murder).

🔹 4. Important Case Laws (Explained in Detail)

Case 1: Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) 4 SCC 427

Facts:
Laxmi, a young woman, was attacked with acid in 2005 after rejecting a man’s marriage proposal. She suffered severe facial burns and disfigurement.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court, while hearing her PIL, issued landmark directions to:

Regulate acid sale (only licensed dealers, sale to individuals above 18, with valid ID).

Provide free medical treatment for acid victims in government and private hospitals.

Mandate compensation of at least ₹3 lakh to victims.

Significance:
This case led to the inclusion of Sections 326A and 326B IPC and improved victim rehabilitation schemes.

Case 2: State of Rajasthan v. Parthu (2007) 12 SCC 754

Facts:
The accused threw acid on his wife during a domestic quarrel, causing serious burns.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court upheld conviction under Section 307 IPC (attempt to murder), observing that acid is a deadly weapon capable of causing death.

Significance:
Before Section 326A existed, acid attack cases were punished under Section 307 IPC. The Court emphasized that acid attack amounts to a brutal form of attempted murder, not mere hurt.

Case 3: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Wasim (2018) 3 SCC 545

Facts:
The accused threw acid on a girl after she refused his friendship proposal. The attack occurred in a public place.

Judgment:
The Supreme Court convicted him under Section 326A IPC, affirming a 10-year rigorous imprisonment.
The Court reiterated that societal deterrence must guide sentencing in acid attack cases.

Significance:
This case highlighted how public attacks motivated by rejection fall squarely under 326A IPC, stressing strong punishment as a deterrent.

Case 4: State v. Praveen (Delhi Trial Court, 2015)

Facts:
An employer threw acid on a female employee after she refused his sexual advances. The attack caused third-degree burns on her face and neck.

Judgment:
The accused was convicted under Sections 326A, 354 (assault to outrage modesty), and 509 IPC (insulting modesty).
The Court observed that workplace harassment escalating to acid attacks shows the need for strict workplace safety protocols.

Significance:
This case set a precedent for zero tolerance of sexual harassment leading to physical violence, reinforcing employer responsibility in ensuring employee safety.

Case 5: Preeti Rathi v. State of Maharashtra (2019) Bombay High Court

Facts:
Preeti Rathi, a young nurse, was attacked with acid at a Mumbai railway station by a man whose marriage proposal she had rejected. She succumbed to her injuries.

Judgment:
The Trial Court convicted the accused under Sections 302 (murder), 326A, and 326B IPC, imposing death penalty, later upheld by the Bombay High Court.

Significance:
It was one of the first capital punishments awarded in an acid attack case, illustrating the judiciary’s zero-tolerance stance when the act results in death.

🔹 5. Comparative Perspective (Briefly)

UK: Punishes acid attacks under Offences Against the Person Act, 1861, treating acid as a corrosive weapon. Sentences can extend to life imprisonment.

Bangladesh: One of the first countries to enact Acid Crime Prevention Act, 2002, with death penalty for fatal attacks and strict regulation on acid sale.

🔹 6. Conclusion

Criminal liability for acid attacks extends beyond mere physical assault — it represents premeditated cruelty, often driven by revenge, rejection, or control.
The law now ensures:

Severe punishment (10 years to life)

Mandatory compensation and rehabilitation

Preventive control over acid sale

However, the implementation of victim protection, medical support, and social reintegration remains as important as criminal punishment.

✅ Summary Table

Environment	Typical Motive	Legal Sections	Key Case	Nature of Liability
Domestic	Dowry, jealousy	326A, 307, 498A	State of Rajasthan v. Parthu	Criminal (individual)
Workplace	Sexual harassment	326A, 354, 509	State v. Praveen	Criminal + Employer liability
Public	Rejection, revenge	326A, 302	Preeti Rathi case	Criminal (personal)