Liability For Acid Attacks In Urban, Rural, And Workplace Environments
Criminal Liability for Acid Attacks in Urban, Rural, and Workplace Environments
Acid attacks are violent crimes where acid or a corrosive substance is thrown onto a victim with the intent to cause harm, usually disfigurement. In India, acid attacks have been a significant issue, particularly affecting women, and are often motivated by personal, sexual, or revenge-driven reasons. These attacks can take place in various settings such as urban areas, rural areas, and even workplaces.
The criminal liability for acid attacks is covered under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, and other relevant laws. This article discusses the criminal liability and legal framework surrounding acid attacks in different environments, focusing on landmark cases that have shaped the legal approach to such crimes.
1. Case: Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) – Landmark Case on Acid Attack Victims
Facts: Laxmi Agarwal, a victim of an acid attack in Delhi, filed a petition with the Supreme Court of India seeking better protection and justice for acid attack survivors. Laxmi was attacked in 2005 by a man named Naeem Khan, who had been rejected by her. He threw acid on her face, causing severe disfigurement and lifelong physical and psychological harm. Laxmi’s case became a symbol of the fight for the rights of acid attack victims in India.
The petition demanded that the government take strict measures to control the sale of acids, and also sought compensation for victims of acid attacks, as well as reforms in the legal system to ensure faster and fairer trials for such offenses. Additionally, Laxmi requested the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to be amended to address the issue of acid attacks.
Ruling: The Supreme Court of India in this case made several important directions:
It ruled that acid attacks should be treated as a severe form of assault, covered under Section 326A of the IPC.
The Court directed that acid attacks should be specifically covered under Section 326A (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons) and Section 326B (throwing acid or corrosive substance).
The Court also issued guidelines for the sale of acid, ensuring that it cannot be sold over the counter without proper documentation and verification.
It further emphasized the need for immediate compensation to acid attack victims, regardless of the outcome of the trial.
The Laxmi v. Union of India case was a watershed moment for the legal framework concerning acid attacks. It led to the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, which specifically addressed acid attacks under Section 326A and Section 326B of the IPC. The ruling also recognized the victim’s right to rehabilitation and compensation and laid down guidelines for the sale of acids, aimed at reducing the incidence of such crimes.
2. Case: State of Haryana v. Surender (2011) – Acid Attack in Rural Area
Facts: In a rural village in Haryana, a man named Surender attacked a woman with acid after she rejected his advances. The woman, a neighbor, had repeatedly declined Surender's proposal for marriage, which led to his anger. In retaliation, Surender attacked her by throwing acid on her face, severely damaging her eyesight and facial features.
The case was brought before the local court, and the prosecution argued that Surender's actions were premeditated, and the acid attack was intended to cause permanent harm to the woman. Surender was charged under Section 326A (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons) and Section 307 (attempted murder) of the IPC.
Ruling: The Punjab and Haryana High Court found Surender guilty of Section 326A for causing grievous harm by throwing acid and Section 307 for the attempted murder of the woman. The Court sentenced him to life imprisonment. The Court emphasized that acid attacks not only cause physical harm but also psychological trauma and irreparable damage to the victim’s dignity. The High Court affirmed the need for stringent punishment for acid attack crimes to serve as a deterrent to potential offenders, particularly in rural areas where women are often vulnerable to such acts of violence.
This case reinforced the growing recognition of acid attacks as serious crimes and demonstrated the application of Section 326A in cases involving deliberate harm using corrosive substances.
3. Case: Manoj Kumar v. State of Bihar (2012) – Acid Attack in the Workplace
Facts: In this case, a young woman working as a receptionist in a private office in Patna was attacked by her colleague, Manoj Kumar. The victim had rejected Manoj’s advances, and he, in retaliation, threw acid on her face in the office. The attack left the woman severely disfigured, and she was rushed to the hospital with life-threatening injuries.
The police arrested Manoj Kumar and charged him under Section 326A and Section 307 of the IPC, as well as under Section 3(1)(a) of the Prevention of Sexual Harassment at the Workplace Act, 2013. The victim’s family also filed a complaint for mental harassment and workplace abuse.
Ruling: The Patna District Court convicted Manoj Kumar under Section 326A (causing grievous hurt by acid) and Section 307 (attempted murder). The Court also took into consideration the workplace harassment angle, acknowledging the vulnerability of women in office settings where such attacks may be precipitated by harassment or personal vendettas.
The Court sentenced Manoj Kumar to life imprisonment and a significant fine. The judgment reflected the need for workplace protections against such violence and harassment, stressing the importance of safeguarding women in both professional and personal spaces.
4. Case: Shubhranshu v. State of West Bengal (2016) – Acid Attack in Urban Setting
Facts: In this urban case, Shubhranshu, a man from Kolkata, threw acid on his former girlfriend after she ended their relationship. The woman had moved on to a new relationship, which enraged Shubhranshu. He planned the attack, ambushed her while she was walking on a busy street, and threw acid on her face, causing permanent disfigurement and severe physical damage.
The police arrested Shubhranshu and charged him under Section 326A, Section 307, and Section 354 (assault or criminal force with intent to outrage modesty) of the IPC.
Ruling: The Calcutta High Court found Shubhranshu guilty under Section 326A (voluntarily causing grievous hurt) and Section 307 (attempted murder) for throwing acid. The Court emphasized the need to punish such crimes with the utmost severity, as acid attacks not only inflict physical harm but also leave lifelong scars, both emotional and psychological.
The Court convicted Shubhranshu to life imprisonment and ordered the payment of compensation to the victim. The case set an important precedent for handling acid attacks in urban environments, stressing the importance of both criminal and civil action in ensuring justice for the victims.
5. Case: State v. Nand Kishore (2015) – Acid Attack with a Political Motivation
Facts: Nand Kishore, a political rival of a local politician, allegedly attacked a woman associated with his opponent’s political campaign. The woman was an active member of a social movement supporting a particular political candidate. Nand Kishore threw acid on her face in an attempt to silence her political activism. This act of retaliation was premeditated, as Nand Kishore believed the woman’s political engagement posed a threat to his candidate’s chances.
The victim survived but sustained severe burns and facial disfigurement. Nand Kishore was charged under Section 326A (voluntarily causing grievous hurt), Section 307 (attempted murder), and Section 120B (criminal conspiracy).
Ruling: The Allahabad High Court convicted Nand Kishore for committing the acid attack with a political motivation. The Court held that such crimes, which seek to suppress free expression or political dissent, were particularly heinous. The Court imposed a life sentence and fined the defendant for causing permanent damage to the victim’s life.
This case reflected the growing concern over the use of acid attacks as a means of silencing political opponents or activists, especially in rural and semi-urban areas where local political rivalries can lead to violent acts.
Key Legal Provisions for Acid Attacks
Indian Penal Code (IPC):
Section 326A: Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means (including acid).
Section 326B: Throwing or attempting to throw acid or a corrosive substance with the intent to cause harm.
Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013:
This amendment introduced specific provisions addressing acid attacks, ensuring stronger penalties for the perpetrators and making the crime more defined under the IPC.
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:
Though not specifically about acid attacks, this law provides a broader framework for preventing violence against women, including domestic violence and threats of harm.
Prevention of Sexual Harassment at Workplace Act, 2013:
Section 3 specifically criminalizes acts of harassment or violence against women in the workplace, including acid attacks.
RELATED Blog
comments