On 11 December 2025, a Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made powerful observations during a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by acid attack survivor Shaheen Malik, urging an “iron hand” approach to such heinous crimes.
The court proposed charging offenders, particularly in cases of forced acid ingestion, under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for attempt to murder, which allows for life imprisonment, instead of the milder grievous hurt provisions that often result in lighter sentences.
Hearing the PIL’s plea to amend the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act to include acid attack victims especially those suffering internal injuries the bench issued notices to all states and Union territories, directed High Courts to submit reports on pending cases within four weeks, and scheduled the next hearing after six weeks.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, described the acts as driven by “animal instinct” with no right for perpetrators to “roam free,” while survivor Malik highlighted her 15-year trial ordeal as a “mockery of the legal system.” This comes amid ongoing concerns over low conviction rates and delays, marking a potential turning point for victim justice.
Devastating Impact Fuels Demand for Harsher Justice
Acid attacks represent one of the most barbaric forms of violence, predominantly targeting women and girls, leaving them with severe physical disfigurement, blindness, organ failure, and profound psychological trauma that lasts a lifetime.
In forced ingestion cases, like those emphasised in the hearing, victims endure excruciating internal burns to the oesophagus, stomach, and lungs, often resulting in drastic weight loss such as one 28-year-old woman reduced to just 20 kg with haemoglobin levels at a critical 3 and requiring multiple surgeries costing lakhs.
Chief Justice Surya Kant remarked starkly, “In the penal code, such ruthless cases should have stringent conditions more than UAPA,” drawing a comparison to anti-terror laws to underscore the gravity, while Justice Bagchi pointed out that current RPwD Act definitions fail to recognise internal injuries, denying survivors essential welfare benefits like rehabilitation and employment quotas.
Shaheen Malik, attacked in 2009 in Jammu and Kashmir over a family dispute, shared her harrowing journey: enduring 15 years of trial delays, social stigma, and inadequate support, which prompted the court to order day-to-day hearings in her specific case.
National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) statistics paint a grim picture, with over 1,000 reported incidents in the last five years and a conviction rate of merely 37.2%, revealing deep flaws in investigation, prosecution, and enforcement despite 2013 legal amendments mandating acid regulation, victim compensation funds, and speedy trials.
Decades of Delays and Gaps in Legal Safeguards
The Supreme Court’s intervention builds on a troubling history of systemic failures in addressing acid violence in India. Shaheen Malik’s PIL seeks explicit inclusion of acid attack victims under the RPwD Act, following years of advocacy after the 2013 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act introduced provisions for free medical treatment, ₹3 lakh compensation, and bans on over-the-counter acid sales measures stemming from landmark cases like Laxmi Agarwal’s 2015 petition.
Yet, challenges persist: underreporting due to stigma, corruption in acid sales, and judicial backlogs, as seen in Jammu and Kashmir where five pending cases now face fast-tracking orders.
Recent precedents amplify the urgency a 16-year delay in a Delhi acid attack case was branded a “national shame” by the court earlier this month, while high-profile incidents, such as the 2023 Delhi assault on a 17-year-old and marital brutality-linked attacks, have spurred activist campaigns.
The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) runs schemes for survivor aid, but coverage remains patchy, with many victims from rural areas or minority communities falling through cracks.
The bench’s directive for High Courts to monitor and expedite trials signals a proactive shift, potentially influencing nationwide reforms to bridge these gaps and ensure accountability.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The Logical Indian wholeheartedly endorses the Supreme Court’s unflinching stance, which resonates deeply with our core values of empathy, kindness, and harmony by prioritising survivor dignity over perpetrator leniency. By equating acid attacks to attempted murder and expanding disability protections, this ruling paves the way for true coexistence where justice deters brutality, communities rally around the vulnerable, and legal systems foster healing rather than endless suffering. It calls for collective action: stricter acid controls, specialised courts, comprehensive rehabilitation, and education to uproot the misogyny fuelling these crimes.
