NewKerala.com

SC Expands Disability Law to Cover Acid Attack Survivors with Internal Injuries

The Supreme Court has expanded the definition of acid attack survivors under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, to include those who suffer internal injuries even without external disfigurement. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked the Centre to amend the Act's Schedule to include victims forcibly administered acid. The court also called for stricter punishments and the attachment of attackers' assets, including joint family property. It noted an alarming increase in acid attack cases and urged a more robust prevention mechanism.

Key Points: SC Expands Disability Law for Acid Attack Survivors

  • SC extends disability law to acid attack survivors with internal injuries
  • Court calls for stricter punishments and asset seizure of attackers
  • Bench asks Centre to amend Schedule under Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act
  • Court notes alarming increase in acid attack cases
2 min read

SC extends disability law to acid attack survivors who suffer internal injuries

Supreme Court extends disability benefits to acid attack survivors with internal injuries, calls for stricter punishments and attacker asset seizure.

"Why don't the assets of the attacker also be attached, including a share in the coparcenary or Joint Hindu family party. - Supreme Court bench"

New Delhi, May 4

The Supreme Court on Monday observed that there is an inadequacy of the punishments prescribed in case of acid attacks and also held that attack survivors who suffer internal injuries, even if there is no outer disfigurement, come under the ambit of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked the Central government to amend the Schedule under the Act, which excludes such victims from the ambit of provisions granting benefits.

At present, the Schedule attached with the Act defines acid attack victims as persons who get disfigured "due to violent assaults by throwing of acid or similar corrosive substance"; however, the bench noted that the definition excludes cases where such substances are forcibly administered.

The top court ordered, "We will appreciate it if the deemed amendment is notified. Post the matter after two weeks."

The apex court further opined that those who are selling acid illegally should be held accountable and made vicariously liable in acid attack cases.

The top court was hearing a petition filed seeking protection for victims who were forcibly administered acid or did not have external injuries on their bodies.

Hearing the case, the bench remarked that such attackers should be deprived of their assets.

"Why don't the assets of the attacker also be attached, including a share in the coparcenary or Joint Hindu family party. We talk about self dignity etc... why should the accused not suffer?" said the bench.

It also observed there had been an "alarming increase" in the number and brutality of acid-attack cases.

"The alarming increase in cases is itself a serious issue of consideration that we should have probably brought a more robust mechanism to prevent this...," the CJI told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

S
Sarah B
As someone who works with acid attack survivors, I can't stress enough how crucial this is. Many victims are forcibly administered acid, which causes severe internal injuries but leaves no external marks. The current law ignored them completely. The SC's decision to include them under the Disability Act is a game-changer. Also, holding illegal acid sellers vicariously liable is long overdue. Kudos to the bench!
V
Vikram M
Good judgment, but why only now? Acid attacks have been a scourge for years. The SC correctly points out the "alarming increase" in cases—we need stricter laws and better enforcement at the ground level. Also, attaching the attacker's share in a Joint Hindu family property is a strong deterrent. But let's not forget: we also need more rehabilitation centers and mental health support for survivors.
J
James A
Impressed by the SC's proactive approach here. Expanding the disability law to cover internal injuries is a nuanced and necessary step. The fact that the bench is also targeting illegal acid sellers shows they understand the ecosystem behind these crimes. However, I hope the implementation doesn't get bogged down in bureaucracy. Survivors need immediate access to benefits and medical care.
P
Priya S
This is a heartening ruling, but I have mixed feelings. While it's great that internal injuries are now recognized, we need to be careful—the definition of "disability" shouldn't be stretched so wide that it dilutes the benefits for others. Also, the focus on asset attachment is good, but why not push for faster trials? Many victims wait years for justice. Still, a positive step forward. 🙂
R
Rohit P

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50