Life Imprisonment Punishment instead of 7 year imprisonment for Acid Attacker : Bombay High Court

When she rejected to marry him, Appellant/Accused removed one bottle, which was containing acid, and threw that acid on her face. The acid not only burnt her face and eyes, but it also dropped and spread on her neck, both hands, legs and other parts of the body.

Coming to the quantum of sentence imposed on the Accused by the Trial Court, that of seven years of imprisonment and payment of compensation of Rs.10,000/- to her father, under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C., by quoting reason that a young girl like Neha is not likely to lead a normal life due to the permanent disfigurement caused to the visible parts of her body like face, neck, hands, in our considered opinion, the punishment imposed by the Trial Court is too meagre and inadequate and it calls for the interference.

It is surprising that despite making such observations and refusing leniency in award of punishment to the Appellant, the Trial Court has imposed merely the imprisonment of seven years only. The punishment provided for the offence under Section 307 of IPC is that of imprisonment for life, if hurt is caused to the victim on account of the act of the Accused. Here in the case, it was not only a simple or grievous hurt, which is caused to Neha, a young girl with bright future, but the hurt is such that it has left an indelible mark and a permanent disfigurement of her face. Needless to state, that the injuries caused by the acid are the most painful and they result into a permanent damage. As deposed by Medical Expert Dr. Daddi, even after several such operations, including the operation of skin grafting, her injuries cannot be cured completely. She will never become normal on account of permanent disfigurement of her face, neck, hands and other parts of the body. Therefore, here in the case, the hurt caused is a permanent damage to her physically and psychologically. Hence, no other punishment except that of the maximum punishment of life imprisonment can do real justice to her. Awarding of amount of compensation of Rs. 10,000/-, when already her father has incurred the expenses of Rs.4,50,000/-, is not going to give any solace to Neha. Therefore, that cannot be a reason to award punishment less than the life imprisonment to the Appellant

As observed by the Apex Court in State of M.P. Vs. Kashiram and Ors., AIR 2009 SC 1642, “the punishment to be awarded to the crime must not be irrelevant, but it should confirm and be consistent with the atrocity and brutality with which the crime has been perpetrated, the enormity of crime warranting public abhorrence and it should respond to the society's cry for justice against the criminal.

Finally, the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed Criminal Appeal No.686 of 2007 preferred by the State for enhancement of sentence of the Appellant is allowed. The Appellant is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2,00,000/-, which shall be awarded as compensation, to Neha under Section 357(1) of Cr.P.C. In default of payment of fine, Appellant to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for two years. Police are directed to intensify their efforts to trace the Appellant and to bring him to book to undergo the sentence and punishment imposed by this Court.

For more details read judgement: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.324 OF 2007 along with C A.No.686/2007 Kailas Sitram Adagale Vs. State of Maharastra and Neha Ajay Malviy Dated: 22.02.201