This article deals with the Indian Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013 which was passed as a reaction after the 2012 gang rape case that happened in Delhi and signaled that it was time to change the penal laws for the protection of women.
One change included in the act was Section 326A – relating to acid attacks. This section is gender neutral in nature and this article studies the judicial history of acid attacks and of section 326A, along with providing a critical analysis of the provision in the legislation.
Finally, this article shall study and conclude on the application of ‘strict liability’ on this provision and provide the author’s views on the same whether the legislation we have is adequate enough or not, or what addition should have been made by the government on the face of it from the Law Commission Report.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Ravinder Singh v. State of Haryana
3. Gulab Sahiblal Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra
4. Marepally Venkata Sree Nagesh v. State of Andhra Pradesh
5. Balu v. State (represented by the Inspector of police)
6. Devanand v. The State
7. Ramesh Dey and ors. v. State of West Bengal
8. Ram Charittar and Anr. etc. v. State of Uttar Pradesh etc.
9. Awadhesh Roy v. State of Jharkhand
10. State (Delhi Administration) v. Mewa Singh
11. Acid Attack and Strict Liability
12. Absolute crimes
13. Intentional Crimes
14. The Conclusion: Should it be a strict liability?
Research Objectives and Key Themes
This paper examines the judicial history of acid attacks in India and provides a critical analysis of Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code. The central research question explores whether the principle of strict liability should be applied to these offences, given the inadequacies of the current legal framework in protecting victims and ensuring effective deterrence.
- Evolution of Indian penal laws regarding violence against women.
- Judicial analysis of past acid attack cases and sentencing disparities.
- Distinction between absolute crimes and intentional crimes within criminal law.
- Evaluation of the deterrent theory and the potential for strict liability implementation.
Excerpt from the Book
Acid Attack and Strict Liability
Acid Attack, as a crime is one of the most heinous crime one can do against women, almost equal to that of rape. This crime itself can ruin the life of a woman forever, including making life a living hell for the family members of the innocent girl. This article is about the application of the strict liability principle in acid attack cases, and in my opinion, should be imposed on the accused for the same. This crime is a crime res ipsa loquitor and could not have been done unintentionally, or in good faith. The application of strict liability principle is hence not unwarranted in this aspect.
To understand what we mean by the aforesaid, let us first see what crime is. Crime has been defined as:
“A crime is an unlawful act or default which is an offence against the public and renders the person guilty of the act liable to legal punishment.”
- Halsbury’s Laws of England
“Crimes are wrongs whose sanction is punitive, and is remissible by the Crown, if at all”
- Professor Kenny
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides a legal definition of acid attacks under Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code and outlines the context of its introduction following the Nirbhaya rape case.
Ravinder Singh v. State of Haryana: Discusses a case where acid was used to cause grievous hurt and death, highlighting the previous legal classification of such acts as simple grievous hurt.
Gulab Sahiblal Shaikh v. The State of Maharashtra: Analyzes the horrific nature of an acid attack on a woman and her child, criticizing the inadequacy of victim compensation.
Marepally Venkata Sree Nagesh v. State of Andhra Pradesh: Reviews a case where chemical substances were used as weapons, emphasizing the judiciary's role in murder convictions.
Balu v. State (represented by the Inspector of police): Examines a case of acid attack against a pregnant woman, resulting in life imprisonment for the perpetrator.
Devanand v. The State: Highlights judicial variance in sentencing before specific laws against acid attacks were explicitly established.
Ramesh Dey and ors. v. State of West Bengal: Details a targeted attack on a family, illustrating the severe physical impact of acid violence.
Ram Charittar and Anr. etc. v. State of Uttar Pradesh etc.: Discusses a land-dispute related attack that resulted in multiple victims, noting the lack of compensation for surviving family members.
Awadhesh Roy v. State of Jharkhand: Focuses on the judicial tendency to downplay the nature of offences by focusing on injury severity rather than intent.
State (Delhi Administration) v. Mewa Singh: Criticizes the judicial mockery of justice where an acid attacker received a minimal sentence due to a lack of recognized legislative provisions at the time.
Acid Attack and Strict Liability: Argues that acid attacks should be treated as crimes where the accused is strictly liable due to the impossibility of the act being committed unintentionally.
Absolute crimes: Defines crimes where the element of mens rea is dispensed with, using examples like drug and food adulteration laws.
Intentional Crimes: Explains the traditional legal requirement of proving criminal intent (mens rea) and argues why this category is currently applied to acid attacks.
The Conclusion: Should it be a strict liability?: Summarizes the argument that adopting a strict liability principle would provide faster justice and act as a necessary deterrent against acid violence.
Keywords
Acid attacks, Indian Penal Code, Section 326A, Strict liability, Mens rea, Criminal law, Victim compensation, Deterrent theory, Heinous crime, Judiciary, Women protection, Justice, Legislation, Absolute crimes, Intentional crimes
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
The research focuses on the legal status of acid attacks in India, specifically analyzing the effectiveness of Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code and advocating for the implementation of the strict liability principle.
What are the central themes covered in the paper?
The paper covers the historical evolution of laws regarding violence against women, judicial case law analysis, the concept of mens rea, and the necessity of victim compensation.
What is the main objective of the author?
The author aims to demonstrate that current legal standards for acid attacks are insufficient and suggests that adopting strict liability would create a more effective deterrent for these heinous crimes.
Which scientific method is utilized in this study?
The study employs a doctrinal legal research method, analyzing statutory provisions, judicial precedents, and international legal theories regarding criminal liability.
What does the main body of the work explore?
The main body examines various judicial cases prior to and after the 2013 Criminal Law Amendment, highlighting the inconsistency in court rulings and the failure of existing laws to adequately punish perpetrators.
Which keywords characterize this study?
The key concepts include acid attacks, strict liability, Indian Penal Code, victim compensation, mens rea, and judicial reform.
Why does the author classify acid attacks as 'res ipsa loquitor'?
The author argues that an acid attack is a physical act that almost by definition cannot be committed accidentally or in good faith, thereby justifying the shift from intentional crime status to strict liability.
What criticism does the author level against the Indian judicial system?
The author criticizes the judiciary for being overly lenient and for relying heavily on a reformative approach that has failed to effectively prevent acid attacks, suggesting a transition toward a deterrent-based system.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Debadatta Bose (Autor:in), 2014, Acid Attacks in India. Should Strict Liability be the norm?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/307901
