The Supreme Court was hearing a petition filed by acid attack victim and activist Shaheen Malik, who said the pain caused by acid eating away at a person’s life and identity is “incredibly traumatic”. File | Photo credit: PTI
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (Jan 27, 2026) recommended that the property of people found guilty of acid attacks be seized and auctioned to compensate their victims, both as a punishment and as a deterrent.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, who heads the Bench, said the crime of acid attacks should result in “extraordinary punitive measures that go beyond the letter of the law”.
The Supreme Court said that adopting a “reformist approach has no place for attackers”. The lawyer said the attackers could also come from the “lowest” strata of society and have almost no assets to their name.
A necessary deterrent
“If a person is found guilty of acid attack, why shouldn’t all his property be recovered and auctioned in a transparent manner to compensate the victim. The police should investigate his property, to whom it belongs etc. and submit the details along with the charge sheet to the court, which should order an embargo on the creation of third party rights over the property,” observed Chief Justice Kant.
Chief Justice Kant said state action should be extremely painful for those convicted of the crime. Otherwise, the sentence would not act as a deterrent against future attacks, especially on young women and children, he said.
“Incredibly traumatic”
The court was hearing a petition filed by acid attack survivor and activist Shaheen Malik, who said the pain caused by acid consuming a person’s life and identity is “incredibly traumatic”.
“The pain is so terrible, so terrible that I can’t even express it. I had 25 operations. The mental and physical pain is extreme. You lose your sense of identity. I can see at least in one eye. There are many women who are completely blind and who have no help from the state,” said Malíková.
She informed the court that her alleged assailants were recently acquitted by the trial court.
“I fought the case for 16 years. I lost. I am appealing against the verdict in the High Court. Can you please order the High Court to expedite the hearing so that I don’t have to wait another 16 years. I was attacked when I was 20 years old, now I am 42. I lost the best years of my life fighting the case of Justice Chia K. Surch and Mali K. Joymalya Bagchi.
“legislative interventions”
Chief Justice Kant asked her to provide a list of four or five lawyers whom she considered good so that the apex court could appoint them as her legal aid counsel in the High Court.
“We will see that you get the best legal representation,” Chief Justice Kant assured Ms. Malik.
The court asked the Centre, represented by Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave, to consider “legislative interventions” for acid attack survivors.
“This crime should be seen as nothing less than dowry death. There should be a shift of the burden to the accused. Again, why should this crime be part of the general sentencing policy? Why are you not considering an exception?” Chief Justice Kant asked the center’s lawyer.
The bench directed the states to provide a list of acid attack incidents reported annually, number of charge-sheets filed, cases decided, appeals pending, brief details of each victim, their academic qualifications, current employment and marital status, medical treatment and details of expenditure incurred or incurred by the state’s rehabilitation program for acid attack victims, if any. She also separately sought details of victims who were forced to ingest acid.
The court asked states to provide details of any special program they run for survivors.
Reports of 15 high courts submitted to the apex court showed that the maximum number of pending acid attack cases was in Uttar Pradesh at 198, followed by 160 in West Bengal, 114 in Gujarat, 68 in Bihar and 58 in Maharashtra.
Published – 27 Jan 2026 21:00 IST
