Editorial: Nation’s shame
In August, the Lok Sabha was informed that 386 acid attack cases on women were reported during 2018-22 and only 62 persons were convicted.
Hyderabad: The acid attack on a 17-year-old girl in Delhi by a jilted lover and his accomplices is a grim reminder of the poor and inefficient system that has consistently failed to prevent such heinous attacks. Though the Supreme Court had in 2013 prohibited the over-the-counter sale and purchase of acids, the ban is widely violated — with almost non-existent checks and penalties. It is unfortunate that the present system allows anyone to procure acid online for a pittance. There is a need for an urgent review to see how such transactions can be regulated. In August, the Lok Sabha was informed that 386 acid attack cases on women were reported during 2018-22 and only 62 persons were convicted. There are many more such violent attacks that go unreported. As the latest victim of the acid attack battles for her life in Delhi’s Safdarjung Hospital, a look at the law enforcement and justice delivery systems in such cases puts one to shame. According to the latest report of the National Crime Records Bureau, around 93.8% of the acid attack cases were pending in courts at the end of 2018 and only 31 cases were disposed of that year. The alarming rate of pendency in such sensitive cases has raised a question about the pace of judicial proceedings in the country. In 2013, Parliament made amendments to criminalise acid attacks and to provide compensation to survivors of such attacks for medical expenses. But, the plight of acid attack survivors is largely ignored. Until 2013, an acid attack was not recognised as a separate offence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
After the Criminal Law (Amendment Act) 2013, Sections 326A and 326B were inserted in the IPC providing punishment for acid attacks and attempted acid attacks. The amendment was brought about primarily to control and prevent acid attacks, a type of gender-based crime against women. The minimum punishment under these provisions is imprisonment for 10 years, which may be extended to imprisonment for life and a fine, and should be as per the victim’s medical expenses. While ordering a ban on the OTC sale of acids across the country, the apex court had also directed the States to issue acid sale licences to select retailers who were asked to keep a record of those buying acid and submit the list to the nearest police station. It was only to be sold to people with valid ID proof and only if the buyer could satisfactorily explain the reason for procuring the chemical. However, these guidelines are routinely flouted. In transactions that involve e-commerce sites, at least an electronic trail is available, but in the OTC sales of corrosive substances, there is no trail whatsoever. According to a study, nearly 78% of acid attack cases are due to the rejection of a marriage proposal or sexual advances.
