CASE BRIEF: LAXMI v. UNION OF INDIA, (2014) 4 SCC 427

CASE NAME	Laxmi v. Union of India, (2014) 4 SCC 427
CITATION	(2014) 4 SCC (Cri) 802, 2013 SCC OnLine SC 651
COURT	Supreme Court of India
BENCH	Hon’ble Justice R.M. Lodha and Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kallifulla
PETITIONER	Laxmi
RESPONDENT	Union of India and Others
DECIDED ON	18th July 2013

INTRODUCTION

Strong acid attack survivor Laxmi launched a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against the Union of India in this case, leading to the release of suggestions for the benefit of acid attack survivors. The Supreme Court’s decision gave the sufferer compensation and restricted the sale of acid. Acid attacks used to be included in the wide category of crimes that were classified as “grievous harm.”

The Criminal Amendment Act of 2013 passed several new laws, including one that made acid violence a separate crime punishable by a life sentence in prison and a fine, in response to the recommendations made by the “Justice J.S. Verma Commission” after the gang rape that occurred in 2012 and the death of a physiotherapy student. Before this Supreme Court ruling, selling acid on counters was legal, and the government’s compensation was insufficient. Long-term consequences of an acid attack include lifelong pain, permanent damage, and other problems for the victim.

Fighters’ daily lives fall into disarray, and they are too scared and embarrassed to leave their houses or perform their daily tasks. Because of their restrictions and appearance after the attack, there is no guarantee that society would accept them as normal individuals, even though they want to live normal lives. Therefore, in order to reduce similar acid attacks on women, the state should impose harsh penalties on the offenders. Acid attacks were unknown prior to Laxmi v. Union of India and Others, but other cases were reported once they were made public.

FACTS OF THE CASE

After becoming the victim of an acid attack at the age of 15, Laxmi filed this PIL. She grew up in a middle-class family and worked part-time as a salesperson at a bookseller to support her parents. On the fateful day of April 22, 2005, she was visited by two acquaintances who showered her in acid. A crowd gathered when they heard her screams, but nobody tried to help.

She was then taken to the “Ram Manohar Lohiya Hospital,” where she was treated. The youngster had approximately 25% acid blisters on her face, chest, eyes, and wrist, according to the medical report. After she regained consciousness, she told the authorities that Rakhi (his sister-in-law) and Naeem Khan (Guddu) were to blame. She claimed that she had flatly rejected her family friend Naeem Khan’s proposal of marriage. Sections 307 (Attempt to Murder) and 120B (Punishment for Criminal Conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code were violated by the accused and co-accused, the Delhi Sessions Court said.

The accused then appealed with the Delhi High Court against the Sessions Court’s decision. The High Court upheld the ruling of the lower court. Furthermore, “Section 357(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code” mandated that the accused pay the victim Rs. 3 lakhs in damages. Laxmi brought the suffering of victims of acid attacks to the attention of the Supreme Court in 2013 by filing a Public Interest Litigation. Although there are many reasons why people get acid attacks, the most common ones include dowry issues, refusal to be married, and sexual approach rejection. The main objectives of filing this PIL were to improve the reimbursement system, enforce stricter laws pertaining to acid assaults, and completely ban the sale of acid.

ISSUES RAISED

To enact stringent legislation and penalties by significantly amending the Penal Code and Procedural Law concerning the offense of acid attack
To outright forbid the sale of acid and its distribution in stores in order to avoid easy access.
To compensate and reintegrate the victim of an acid assault.

ARGUMENTS FROM BOTH SIDES

Arguments on behalf of the petitioner

The petitioner said that the crime of acid throwing originated from the market’s easy access to acid bottles and containers, which made it simple to carry out such a serious offense. The cost of purchasing the acid bottle ranges from Rs. 30 to Rs. 40, and nobody ever inquires as to why they are purchasing such a hazardous substance that has the potential to permanently ruin someone’s life. Stopping such materials from being sold, which means outright banning the distribution and sale of acid in various forms, is the only option to stop this offense.

The purpose of all state laws is to control the populace. The laws and regulations, the standards, and the penalties for wrongdoing are all included under the legal aspect. The state should make sure that the laws are current and that each and every offense carries a fair penalty.

Instead of using section 307 of the Indian Penal Code to punish the accused for his wrongdoing, society needs to make significant changes to the penal code and procedural law. This is tragic because the victim who suffered from mental trauma and physical pain after the brutal offense, hoping to restore her face that the acid attackers destroyed, has no separate laws in our country that could provide punishments to such an accused and justice to the survivors of acid attacks. This serious offense calls for distinct legislation rather than broad legislation.

Additionally, the petitioner demanded that victims receive free medical care and that survivors of acid attacks receive compensation.

Arguments on behalf of the respondent

The learned solicitor general stated that the Central Government will implement the model guidelines.
The draft laws, which must be implemented within a week, governed the sale of acid and other dangerous chemicals to all state governments and union territories in accordance with “The 1919 Poisons Act.”
Additionally, they insisted that the model standards would address a number of issues, including the types of acids (liquid and crystalline) that can be stored and sold, license issuance, and personal profits. hospitals, companies, government organizations, educational or research institutions, and public sector enterprises.
On this day, “The Hon’ble Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu” said that strict and sufficient laws to regulate the sale of acid and other dangerous chemicals would be regularized in two months.
The administrations of the states and union territories announced their intention to completely eliminate the 1919 Poison Act’s recognition of offenses and the granting of bail.

JUDGMENT

The Indian Supreme Court published the following rules for acid purchasers and sellers. First of all, a seller cannot sell acid to a minor, and a minor has no right to purchase it. Additionally, before buying acid, the qualified buyer must present a photo ID card and specify the reason for the purchase. The seller must then provide this information to the closest police station. The seller is required to provide the S.D.M. with a report on the stock. Additionally, the S.D.M. will have the authority to confiscate the undeclared stock.

Additionally, submitting a registry detailing the amount, use, and purpose of acid used at these institutions is required by SC rules for using acid for research, academic, and other institutional purposes.

CONCLUSION

Although any male or woman could be the victim of an acid attack, it is safe to assume that women are the ones who are most frequently the victims of this crime based on the statistics. In the current case of Laxmi v. Union of India and Ors., the petitioner was attacked with acid after she turned down the accused’s proposal of marriage. This case correctly noted that the current rules do not address this behavior and that the accused frequently takes advantage of the legal loopholes.

Following the hearing of Laxmi’s P.I.L., the Supreme Court imposed stringent instructions that all eight Indian union territories and states had to abide by in addition to ordering the government to change the current legislation. Because of this case, the Supreme Court rendered a landmark decision that will improve the lot of victims of acid attacks. Additionally, it will significantly lower the number of acid attack events. Thousands of other victims of acid attacks who, like Laxmi, were attempting to fit their case within the parameters of the law at the time found solace in Laxmi’s case.

In conclusion, it became illegal to harass women in society by using acid assaults. It gradually developed into a potent weapon in the hands of a male-dominated society to endanger women’s peaceful coexistence. Due to the absence of clear rules and the length of time the court proceedings took, the victims had to endure a great deal of suffering prior to this ruling. But because of its enormous potential to alter the course of acid attacks in India, the Criminal Amendment Act of 2013, introduced by Laxmi’s P.I.L., turned into a beacon of hope for the victims of acid attacks.