The Supreme Court of India addressed the slow pace of justice in acid attack cases, calling it a "mockery of the system".
CJI Justice Surya Kant emphasized that acid attackers should not receive sympathy from courts and urged a strong systemic response.
Shaheen Malik, an acid attack survivor, filed a PIL seeking recognition of survivors as persons with specified disabilities under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The court directed High Courts to provide details on pending acid attack trials and proposed establishing special courts for these cases.
In 2023, there were 207 reported acid attack incidents in India, with West Bengal recording the highest number (57).
Detailed Insights:
The Supreme Court's intervention highlights the urgent need for systemic reforms to ensure timely justice for acid attack victims.
Shaheen Malik's PIL draws attention to the plight of survivors, including those who were forcibly fed acid, advocating for their rights and recognition.
The Solicitor-General supported the petitioners' cause, emphasizing the need for perpetrators to face severe consequences for their actions.
Previous directives from the Supreme Court in Laxmi vs Union Of India and Ors. mandated proper treatment, aftercare, and rehabilitation for acid attack victims, along with regulating acid sales.
Section 124 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita addresses acid attacks, but the reality involves protracted trials and low conviction rates, indicating implementation challenges.
Acid attacks are recognized as a severe form of gender-based violence, necessitating comprehensive support and protection for victims.
Key Concepts Involved:
Public Interest Litigation (PIL): A lawsuit filed in the public interest, addressing grievances of a larger group.
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016: Indian legislation protecting the rights and entitlements of individuals with disabilities.
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: The new penal code of India which replaced the Indian Penal Code.