Acid Attack Victim Compensation WR 12906p

1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CRL.)NO.129 OF 2006
LAXMI
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
...RESPONDENTS
O R D E R
Pursuant
6.02.2015,
to
our
order
dated
the
Ministry of Home Affairs has filed an affidavit dated
8th April, 2015.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties in
considerable detail.
A
cretary
in
meeting
was
convened
by
the
Se
the
Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and the
Secretary in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,
Government
the
of
Secretaries/their
e
India
with
all
Chief
counterparts
in
th
States/Union
Territories on 14.03.2015.
From
figures
the
affidavit,
the
provisional
for
2014 indicate that there were 282 acid attacks in all
Signature Not Verified

the States.
the
Digitally signed by
Sanjay Kumar
The majority of acid attacks were in
Date: 2015.04.16
10:18:19 IST
Reason:
States of Uttar Pradesh (185), Madhya Pradesh (53) and

Gujarat (11).
As
far
as
the
Union
Territories
are
concerned,
Delhi is the only Union Territory where acid attacks

have taken place and the total number of such attacks
in the year 2014 provisionally is 27.
In all, therefore, 309 acid attacks are said to
have taken place provisionally in the year 2014.
As mentioned in our order dated 06.02.2015, with
the
amendment
to
the
Indian
Penal
Code,
nothing
survives in the first prayer made by the petitioner.

The second and third prayers relate to the cost of
treatment of the acid attack victims and application of
Section 357C of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
which was inserted by an Amendment Act in 2013 with
effect from 03.02.2013.
In the meeting convened by the Secretary in the
Ministry
of
Home
Ministry of Health
Affairs
and
the
Secretary
in
the
States
and
and Family Welfare on 14.03.2015, it
has been noted that a Victim Compensation Scheme has

already
been
notified
in
almost
all
the
Union Territories. However, we are told today that the

Victim
Compensation
Scheme
has
been
States and Union Territories.

We have gone through the chart annexed along with
the affidavit filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs and
notified
in
all
we find that despite the directions given by this Court

in Laxmi Vs. Union of India [(2014) 4 SCC 427], the
minimum
three
compensation
of
Rs.3,00,000/-
(Rupees
lakhs only) per acid attack victim has not been fixed
in
In
some
our
of
the
States/Union
Territories.
opinion, it will be appropriate if the Member Secretary

of
the
State
the
up
issue
orders
with
Legal
the
Services
State
Authority
Government
takes
so
that
the
passed by this Court are complied with and a minimum of

Rs.3,00,000/made
(Rupees
three
lakhs
only)
is
find
tha
available to each victim of acid attack.

From
the
t
amount
the
will
figures
not
given
be
above,
burdensome
we
so
far
as
the
State
Governments/Union
and,
Territories
are
concerned
therefore, we do not see any reason why the directions

given by this Court should not be accepted by the State
Governments/Union Territories since they do not involve
any serious financial implication.
We also direct the Member Secretary of the State
Legal Services Authority to obtain a copy of the Victim
Compensation
/Union
Scheme
from
the
concerned
State
Territory and to give it wide and adequate publicity in

the
State/Union
attack
Territory
so
that
each
acid
victim
in
e
the
the
States/Union
benefit of the Victim Compensation Scheme.
Territories
can
tak
Insofar
as
rehabilitation
concerned,
the
proper
of
the
unanimously
that
the
meeting
full
treatment,
aftercare
victims
of
acid
convened
on
14.03.2015
medical
and
attack
assistance
is
notes
should
be
provided to the victims of acid attack and that private

hospitals should also provide free medical treatment to
such victims.
It is noted that there may perhaps be
some reluctance on the part of some private hospitals

to provide free medical treatment and, therefore, the
concerned officers in the State Governments should take
up the matter with the private hospitals so that they
are also required to provide free medical treatment to
the victims of acid attack.
The decisions taken in the meeting read as follows:
7
The States/UTs will take a serious note of the

directions of the Supreme Court with regard to
treatment and payment of compensation to acid
attack
victims
directions
through
and
the
to
implement
issue
of
these
requisite
orders/notifications.
7
The private hospitals will also be brought on

board for compliance and the States/UTs will
use necessary means in this regard.
No
hospital/clinic
should
citing lack of specialized facilities.
refuse
treatment
First-aid must be administered to the victim

and
after
stabilization,
the
victim/patient
could be shifted to a specialized facility for

further treatment, wherever required.
7
Action
may
be
taken
against
hospital/clinic
for refusal to treat victims of acid attacks

and
other
crimes
in
contravention
of
the
provisions
of
Section
357C
of
the
Code
of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.
We
expect
the
authorities
to
comply
with
th
ese
decisions.
Although it is not made clear in the meeting held
on
14.03.2015,
what
we
understand
by
free
medical
treatment is not only provision of physical treatment

to the victim of acid attack but also availability of
medicines, bed and food in the concerned hospital.
We,
therefore,
issue
direction
that
the
St
ate
Governments/Union Territories should seriously discuss
and take up the matter with all the private hospitals
in their respective State/Union Territory to the effect
that the private hospitals should not refuse treatment
to
t
victims
of
acid
attack
and
that
should be provided to such victims including medicines,

food, bedding and reconstructive surgeries.
full
treatmen
We also issue a direction that the hospital, where

the victim of an acid attack is first treated, should
give a certificate that the individual is a victim of
an acid attack. This certificate may be utilized by the
victim for treatment and reconstructive surgeries or
any other scheme that the victim may be entitled to
with the State Government or the Union Territory, as
the case may be.
In the event of any specific complaint against any
private
hospital
or
government
hospital,
the
acid
attack victim will, of course, be at liberty to take

further action.
With regard to the banning of sale of acid across
the counter, we direct the Secretary in the Ministry of
Home Affairs and Secretary in the Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare to take up the matter with the State
Governments/Union
appropriate
Territories
notification
to
to
this
ensure
effect
within a period of three months from today. It appears

that some States/Union Territories have already issued
such a notification, but, in our opinion, all States
and Union Territories must issue such a notification at
the earliest.
The final issue is with regard to the setting up of
a Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. In the meeting
that
is
an
issued
held on 14.03.2015, the unanimous view was that since

the
District
lready
Legal
constituted
in
in
providing
acid
Services
every
Authority
district
appropriate
and
is
assistance
is
involved
relating
to
quite
reasonable.
attack victims, perhaps it may not be necessary to set

up a separate Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. In
other words, a multiplicity of authorities need not be
created.
In
our
opinion,
this
view
is
Therefore, in case of any compensation claim made by

any acid attack victim, the matter will be taken up by
the
District
Legal
Services
Authority,
which
will
include
ted
the
persons
e
of
who
District
the
Judge
District
and
such
Judge
other
feels
co-op
will
assistance, particularly the District Magistrate, the

Superintendent of Police and the Civil Surgeon or the
Chief
their
Medical
nominee.
nal
This
Officer
body
of
will
that
function
Injuries Compensation Board for all purposes.

A copy of this order be sent to learned counsel
appearing for the Secretary in the Ministry of Home
Affairs and the Secretary in the Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare for onward transmission and compliance
to the Chief Secretary or their counterparts in all the
District
as
or
the
Crimi
The Chief Secretary will ensure that the order is

sent to all the District Magistrates and due publicity
is given to the order of this Court.
A copy of this order should also be sent to the
Member Secretary of NALSA for onward transmission and
compliance to the Member Secretary of the State Legal
Services
Authority
in
all
the
States
and
Union
the
above
Territories. The Member Secretary of the State Legal

Services Authority will ensure that it is forwarded to
the Member Secretary of each District Legal Services
Authority who will ensure that due publicity is given
to the order of this Court.
The
writ
petition
is
disposed
of
in
terms.
.............................J.
(MADAN B. LOKUR)
.............................J.
(UDAY UMESH LALIT)
NEW DELHI
APRIL 10, 2015
ITEM NO.302
COURT NO.9
SECTION PIL
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I N D I A
Writ Petition(Criminal) No.129/2006

LAXMI
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA
& ORS.
Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents,

exemption from filing O.T., brining on record, directions,
impleadment, permission to file counter affidavit, C/delay in
filing affidavit and office report)
(For final disposal)
WITH
W.P.(C) No. 867/2013
(With appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and impleadment and
Office Report)
Date :
today.
10/04/2015
These
petitions
were
called
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Petitioner(s)
Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
Aparna Bhat, AOR

Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Adv.
Tanima Kishore, Adv.
Sumit Kumar, Adv.
Shivangi Singh, Adv.
Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Sumeeta Choudhary, Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR
For Respondent(s)
UOI
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
A. Mariyaputham, Sr. Adv.

Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv.
S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv.
Gaurav Sharma, Adv.
Meenakshi Grover, Adv.
D.L. Chidanand, Adv.
Sunita Sharma, Adv.
on
for
hearing
10
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Rashmi Malhotra, Adv.

S.N. Terdal, Adv.
Ajay Sharma, Adv.
Zaid Ali, Adv.
Parthiv K. Goswami, Adv.
B.K. Prasad, Adv.
S.S. Rawat, Adv.
D.S. Mahra, Adv.
B.V. Balaram Das, Adv.
Sushma Suri, AOR
For States of
Andhra Pradesh
Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR
Arunachal Pradesh
Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR

Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Assam
Mr. Riku Sarma, Adv.

Ms. Vartika Sahay, Adv.
for Corporate Law Group
Bihar
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR

Mr. Ms. Shubhra Rai, Adv.
Ms. Rashmi Shrivastava, Adv.
Chhattisgarh
Mr. C.D. Singh, AAG

Mr. Darpan Bhuyan, Adv.
Mr. A.P. Mayee, Adv.
Ms. Charudatta Mahindrakar, Adv.
Mr. A. Selvin Raja, Adv.
Goa
Mr.
Ms.
Ms.
for
Pratap Venugopal, Adv.

Supriya Jain, Adv.
Niharika, Adv.
M/s. K. J. John & Co.
Ms. Bansuri Swaraj, Adv.

Ms. Shreya Bhatnagar, Adv.
Gujarat
Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR

Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv.
Ms. Puja Singh, Adv.
Haryana
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
H.P.
Mr. Suryanaryana Singh, AAG
Arun Bhardwaj, AAG

Kiran Ahlawat, Adv.
Ashwani K. Upadhyay, Adv.
Kamal Mohan Gupta, AOR
11
Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR

Jharkhand
Mr. Gopal Prasad, AOR

Mr. Jayesh Gaurav, Adv.
Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mohd. Waquas, Adv.
J&K
Ms. Shilpa Dutta, Adv.
Karnataka
Mr. Parikshit Angdi, Adv.

Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, Adv.
Maharashtra
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
MP
Mr. C.D. Singh, Adv.

Mr. Darpan Bhuyan, Adv.
Manipur
Mr. Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Adv.

Mr. Ashok K. Singh, AOR
Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Adv.
Mizoram
Mr. K.N. Madhusoodhanan, Adv.

Mr. M.J. George, AOR
Shankar Chillarge, AAG

Sonia Shankar Chillarge, Adv.
Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR
Asha Gopalan Nair, Adv.
Mr. Pragyan Sharma, Adv.

Mr. Heshu Kayina, Adv.
Nagaland
Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv.

Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR
Odisha
Mr. S.P. Mishra, AG

Mr. S.S. Mishra, Adv.
Punjab
Mr. Jayant K. Sud, AAG

Ms. Jasleen Chahal, Astt. AAG
Mr. Naresh Bakshi, AOR
Rajasthan
Mr. S.S. Shamshery, AAG

Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv.
Sikkim
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Mr.
A. Mariarputham, AAG
Aruna Mathur, Adv.
Yusuf Khan, Adv.
K. Vijay Kumar, Adv.
12
for M/s Arputham Aruna & Co.

Tamil Nadu
Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR

Ms. J.Janani, Adv.
Mr. Santha Kumaran, Adv.
Telangana
Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, Adv.

for M/s. Venkat Palwai Law Associates
Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Adv.
Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, Adv.
Tripura
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR

Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Ms. Rashmi Shrivastava, Adv.
Uttar Pradesh
Mr. Rao Ranjit, AAG

Mr. Vikrant Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Abhisth Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Ravi P. Mehrotra, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Maurya, Adv.
Mr. Rajeev Dubey, Adv.
Uttarakhand
Mr. Jatinder K. Bhatia, Adv.

Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.
Ms. Rachana Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv.
West Bengal
Mr. Anip Sachthey, AOR

Mr. Saakaar Sardana, Adv.
Ms. Surabhi Sardana, Adv.
Mr. Avijit Bhattacharjee, Adv.
Ms. Upma Shrivastava, Adv.
A&N Islands
Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Adv.

Mrs. G. Indira, AOR
Mr. Balasubramaniam, Adv.
Chandigarh
Ms. Vimla Sinha, Adv.

Mr. Gopal Singh, Adv.
Puducherry
Mr.V.G. Pragasam, AOR

Mr. S.J. Aristotle, Adv.
Mr. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv.
Mr. P. Parmeswaran, AOR
13
Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR

Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, AOR
Mr. S. Thananjayan, AOR
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR
Mr. D. Mahesh Babu, AOR
Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR
Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR
Mr. Gunnam Venkateswara Rao, AOR
Mr. Arun K. Sinha, AOR
Mr. V. G. Pragasam, AOR
Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR
Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, AOR
Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR
Mr. Sangram S. Saran, Adv.
Mr. Shree Pal Singh, AOR
Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR
Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, AOR
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
W.P.(Crl.)NO.129/2006
The
writ
petition
is
disposed
of
on
indicated in the signed reportable order.
the
A copy of this order be sent to learned counsel

appearing for the Secretary in the Ministry of Home
Affairs and the Secretary in the Ministry of Health and
terms
14
Family Welfare for onward transmission and compliance

to the Chief Secretary or their counterparts in all the
The Chief Secretary will ensure that the order is
sent to all the District Magistrates and due publicity
is given to the order of this Court.
A copy of this order should also be sent to the
Member Secretary of NALSA for onward transmission and
compliance to the Member Secretary of the State Legal
Services
Authority
Territories.
The
in
Member
all
the
Secretary
States
and
Union
the
State
Legal
of
Services Authority will ensure that it is forwarded to

the
Member
Secretary
of
each
District
Legal
Services
Authority who will ensure that due publicity is given to

the order of this Court.
Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
W.P.(C) No. 867/2013 (Parivartan Kendra & Anr. V. UOI &
Ors.)
After disposal of the main matter [Laxmi v. Union of
India
learned
(W.P.(Crl.)NO.129/2006)],
senior
counsel
appearing
Mr.
for
Colin
Gonsalves,
the
petitioners
states that he insists on compensation of rupees ten

lakhs to the victim.
Accordingly, since the case now
concerns only grant of compensation, it does not pertain

to the Social Justice Bench.
15
List before the regular Bench, subject to orders of

Hon'ble the Chief Justice.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I)
(TAPAN KUMAR CHAKRABORTY)
COURT MASTER
COURT MASTER
(Signed reportable order is placed on the file)

Acid Attack Victim Compensation WR 12906p

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Acid Attack Victim Compensation WR 12906p

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Acid Attack Victim Compensation WR 12906p

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Signature Not Verified

The majority of acid attacks were in

States of Uttar Pradesh (185), Madhya Pradesh (53) and

Delhi is the only Union Territory where acid attacks

survives in the first prayer made by the petitioner.

and Family Welfare on 14.03.2015, it

has been noted that a Victim Compensation Scheme has

Union Territories. However, we are told today that the

States and Union Territories.

we find that despite the directions given by this Court

opinion, it will be appropriate if the Member Secretary

passed by this Court are complied with and a minimum of

available to each victim of acid attack.

therefore, we do not see any reason why the directions

Territory and to give it wide and adequate publicity in

benefit of the Victim Compensation Scheme.

provided to the victims of acid attack and that private

It is noted that there may perhaps be

some reluctance on the part of some private hospitals

The States/UTs will take a serious note of the

The private hospitals will also be brought on

citing lack of specialized facilities.

First-aid must be administered to the victim

could be shifted to a specialized facility for

for refusal to treat victims of acid attacks

treatment is not only provision of physical treatment

should be provided to such victims including medicines,

We also issue a direction that the hospital, where

attack victim will, of course, be at liberty to take

within a period of three months from today. It appears

held on 14.03.2015, the unanimous view was that since

attack victims, perhaps it may not be necessary to set

Therefore, in case of any compensation claim made by

assistance, particularly the District Magistrate, the

Injuries Compensation Board for all purposes.

States and Union Territories.

The Chief Secretary will ensure that the order is

Territories. The Member Secretary of the State Legal

Writ Petition(Criminal) No.129/2006

(With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents,

Aparna Bhat, AOR

Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv.

A. Mariyaputham, Sr. Adv.

Rashmi Malhotra, Adv.

Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR

Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR

Mr. Riku Sarma, Adv.

Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR

Mr. C.D. Singh, AAG

Pratap Venugopal, Adv.

Ms. Bansuri Swaraj, Adv.

Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR

Mr. Suryanaryana Singh, AAG

Arun Bhardwaj, AAG

Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR

Mr. Gopal Prasad, AOR

Ms. Shilpa Dutta, Adv.

Mr. Parikshit Angdi, Adv.