Editorial: Onus on the accused — acid attack cases need tougher legal action
The Supreme Court’s directive for time-bound, out-of-turn trials for acid attack cases is welcome, but implementation remains the real challenge
Despite stringent laws, India continues to witness cases of acid attacks against women. It is a matter of collective shame that trials in a majority of the cases are still pending. The Supreme Court’s recent suggestion that acid attacks should be treated on the lines of dowry deaths — where the onus of proving innocence lies with the accused — deserves serious consideration by the Centre and other stakeholders. The victims face life-long medical needs, job loss, social ostracism and mental-health trauma, and many slip into poverty and cannot pursue long legal battles. Despite their heinous nature, these crimes rarely provoke sustained public outrage or swift legal action. Survivors are left to endure years, sometimes decades, of trials and appeals. Take the case of acid-attack survivor Shaheen Malik, which has been dragging on since 2009. Here, justice delayed is far worse than justice denied; it’s justice held to ransom as perpetrators roam freely while victims relive their trauma endlessly. The apex court has called for “extraordinary” punitive measures, including retributive punishment, thus sending a clear message that the existing legal and institutional response to acid violence is failing survivors. Proposals such as attaching the assets of convicts to compensate victims reflect a pragmatic approach, acknowledging that rehabilitation is as critical as punishment. The fact that nearly 88% of the acid attack cases are still pending trial is a grim reminder of the serious flaws in the criminal justice system. The Supreme Court has rightly described the unending ordeal of Shaheen Malik as a national shame.
In December last year, the SC had directed all high courts to submit details of pending cases within four weeks. The official figures on acid attacks — 207 cases registered in 2023 as per the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data released in 2025 — do not present a complete picture as many incidents go unreported and, in some cases, the survivors would be forced to withdraw their complaints. According to a study, nearly 78% of the acid attack cases are due to the rejection of a marriage proposal or sexual advances. The apex court had also asked the Centre to consider amending the law so that the survivors are covered under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and can access various welfare schemes. This is a welcome suggestion. If implemented, it can go a long way in helping victims rebuild their lives. An acid attack leaves the survivor scarred for life. The court’s directive for time-bound, out-of-turn trials is welcome, but its implementation is the real challenge. Beyond punishment, the apex court’s push to recognise acid-attack survivors as persons with disabilities under the law is both humane and sensible. Survivors often suffer permanent physical impairment, psychological trauma and loss of livelihood. Access to disability welfare schemes and medical care is not charity — it is a means of picking up the pieces with dignity.
