Bhuvana Marni
Published on: October 14, 2022 at 23:26 IST
According to the Delhi High Court, the term “acid” under Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code encompasses all chemicals that are acidic, corrosive, or burning in nature and capable of producing temporary disfigurement handicap, or permanent disability.
The penalty for acid assaults is outlined in Section 326A of the Code.
According to the law, anybody found guilty of throwing acid that results in permanent or partial damage, disfigurement or disability of any portion of a person’s body, or serious injury is subject to a fine and a period of imprisonment that may range from ten years to life.
In its decision on the appeals filed by three individuals who were found guilty in 2014 of throwing acid on a lady in violation of Sections 326A and 34 of the Code, a division comprising Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Anish Dayal elucidated the clause.
The bench upheld the judgement of the trial court and stated that the prosecution had successfully shown the appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defence attorney for the defendants had contended that neither the chemical used to make the acid nor the victim’s clothing, were taken into custody for additional investigation. The prosecution was unable to prove that the alleged substance was acid, Senior Advocate Mahabir Singh argued.
The court rejected the argument, stating that Section 326A protects against situations in which a person’s body sustains partial or permanent harm that “can not only be caused by an acid but by ‘any other method’.”
The court stated, in reference to Section 326B, that the provision’s Explanation 1 has given the word “acid” used in Section 326A meaning.
“‘Acid’, as per the said Explanation, includes any substance which has the acidic or corrosive character of burning nature capable of causing bodily injury leading to scarce or disfigurement or temporary or permanent disability.”
“Therefore by this provision, it is quite evident that the legislature has included in the meaning of “acid” two clear and categorical aspects: first, any substance with an acidic/corrosive/burning nature; and second, that it has the capability of causing bodily injury leading to scars or disfigurement or temporary or permanent disability,” said the court.
It added, “This is notwithstanding the fact that by including “any other means”, the legislature has intended to apply Section 326A to a larger set substances/methods which may cause such injuries to the person.”
The trial court’s verdict from December 2019 was contested by the appellants before the court. Two of them received sentences of rigorous life imprisonment and fines of Rs. 1 lakh each, while the third defendant received a term of rigorous 10 years in imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50,000.
The trial court ruled that the victim will receive compensation in the sum of Rs. 1.25 lakhs from the total penalties.
The court dismissed the appeals, stating that since the event occurred near railway lines and the appellants fled after it, there was no need to retrieve any of the material and examine it.
“There would be no substantive residue lying there of the substance for the police to recover and examine. In any event, the nature of the substance is clearly of acidic/corrosive/burning nature as is evident from the medical testimonies of the doctors who examined the victim then and in subsequent years,” the bench said.
The court was also of the view that the fact that the victim’s burnt clothes were not recovered and seized by the police was not a factor which could dilute the foundational fact that such an injury was not possible to be self-inflicted by any individual on himself or herself.
It also said that it is impossible to accept that any person would go through tremendous pain and intense medical process just in order to implicate somebody falsely for an assault.
However, the bench ordered that the victim receive the entire amount of the fine as compensation.
The court further stated that she was entitled to at least Rs. 5 Lakhs in total compensation.
“Depending on what is finally paid as fine by the appellants and compensation received by the victim, this Court directs that the balance amount (out of total compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-) be paid to the victim under Uttar Pradesh Victim Compensation Scheme, 2014 (as amended from time to time by the Government of Uttar Pradesh).”
“Accordingly, a copy of this judgment be sent to the Secretary, State Legal Services Authority, Uttar Pradesh for information and necessary action,” the court ordered.
The Supreme Court in September 2015 transferred the case from Mathura to Delhi after a petition was filed by the complainant.
Case Title: Hakim & Anr. vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and other connected matter
