Acquire, auction assets of acid attackers to pay victims, says SC

Why in the News ?

The Supreme Court of India has recommended seizure and auction of assets of convicted acid attackers to compensate victims, calling for extraordinary punitive measures beyond existing legal provisions. The observations were made by a Bench headed by Surya Kant while hearing a petition filed by acid attack survivor and activist Shaheen Malik.

Background

Acid attacks are criminalised under:

• Sections 326A and 326B of the Indian Penal Code (now mirrored in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita)

The Supreme Court has earlier:

• Regulated sale of acid
• Mandated compensation and rehabilitation schemes for victims

Despite legal provisions:

• Conviction rates remain low
• Trials and appeals take years
• Victims face lifelong physical, psychological, and economic trauma

Observations and Directions of the Supreme Court

Asset Seizure as Punishment and Compensation

The court suggested:

• Identification, seizure, and auction of all assets of convicted acid attackers
• Proceeds to be used for victim compensation

Police should:

• Investigate assets during the investigation
• Submit asset details along with the chargesheet

Courts should:

• Impose an embargo on third-party transfers of such assets

Need for Exceptional Sentencing

• Acid attacks are described as crimes warranting:
• Punishment beyond routine sentencing policy
• No scope for a reformative approach

The court observed that:

• Punishment must be “extremely painful” to act as a deterrent, especially for crimes against women and children

Legislative Intervention Suggested

Centre asked to consider:

• Special legal framework for acid attacks
• Shifting the onus of proof in appropriate cases
• Treating acid attacks on par with dowry deaths, given their severity

Questioned why acid attacks should be part of the general sentencing policy

Victim-Centric Approach

Court assured:

• Best legal representation for the petitioner in the appeal proceedings

Directed States to submit:

• Annual data on acid attacks
• Status of investigations, trials, and appeals
• Victims’ education, employment, and marital status
• Medical treatment and rehabilitation expenses
• Details of special schemes, if any
• Separate data on victims forcibly made to ingest acid

Challenges 

Delay in Justice

• Cases drag on for decades, compounding the victim’s trauma

Inadequate Deterrence

• Existing punishments have not curbed the crime effectively.

Weak Rehabilitation

• Medical, psychological, and economic support remains uneven across the state.s

Socio-Economic Realities

• Many attackers may have limited assets, complicating the enforcement of asset seizure.re

Way Forward

Dedicated legislation for acid attacks with:

• Enhanced sentencing
• Mandatory asset forfeiture provisions

Creation of a National Acid Attack Survivors Fund

• Time-bound trials and fast-track appeals
• Uniform, adequately funded State rehabilitation schemes
• Stronger enforcement of acid sale regulations

Long-term support for:

• Reconstructive surgery
• Mental health care
• Education and employment rehabilitation

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s remarks signal a decisive shift from a purely reformative to a deterrence-oriented and victim-centric approach in dealing with acid attacks. By advocating asset seizure, exceptional punishment, and legislative reform, the Court has underlined that acid attacks are not just crimes against individuals but assaults on dignity, bodily integrity, and constitutional values.