• Legal Armor

Quantum Of Compensation For Acid Attack Victims

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a case Nipun Saxena Vs. Union of India held that it would be appropriate if a committee is set up by NALSA preparing the rules for Victim Compensation for sexual offenses and Acid Attacks. After several meetings, the committee finalized the draft, and has finalized the Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/other Crimes and submitted the same before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 24th April 2018.

Section 4 of this rule defines the eligibility for compensation under which “A woman victim or her dependent(s) as the case may be, shall be eligible for grant of compensation from multiple schemes applicable to her. However, the compensation received by her in the other schemes with regard to Section 357-B Cr.P.C. shall be taken into account while deciding the quantum in the subsequent application”.

The minimum and maximum compensation in different cases of acid attacks were as follows –

  • In the case of disfigurement, The minimum compensation is 7 lakhs and maximum compensation is 8 lakhs.

  • In case of injury, More than 50 % minimum compensation is 5 lakhs and maximum compensation is 8 lakhs

  • In case of injury, less than 50% minimum compensation is 3 lakhs and the maximum is 5 lakhs

  • In case of injury, less than 20% minimum compensation is 3 lakhs and the maximum is 4 lakhs.

Victims of Acid attack are also entitled to additional compensation of Rs. 1 lakh under Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund, and also entitled to additional special financial assistance up to Rs. 5 lakhs who need treatment expenses over and above the compensation paid by the respective State/UTs in terms of Central Victim Compensation.

Case laws

  • In the case of Devanand vs. the State, a man threw acid on his alienated wife because she refused to cohabit with him. The wife not only lost her eyesight but also led to permanent mutilation of her face. Although the accused was held guilty by the Court, the punishment awarded was a minimal period of seven years under Section 307 IPC. In this case, there was no compensation awarded by the court that shows the bias-ness done by the court towards the acid attack survivors.

  • In the case of The State Of Maharashtra vs Ankur Narayanlal Panwar, Preeti Rathi was a girl who belongs to Delhi, had got a job as a Lieutenant in the Indian Navy, and had come to Mumbai to join in the INHS Asvini, the naval hospital in Colaba. On her way to work on 2nd May 2013, a man hurled acid on her face which mutilated her eye and infected her kidneys and because of all this injury, it resulted in the death of the victim. In this case, the accused was charged with sections 302, 326-A, and 326-B of IPC. In this case, the Mumbai high court gave the death penalty which makes this a landmark judgment. But after some time the death penalty was converted into life imprisonment.

  • In the case, TIRATH SINGH YADAV vs STATE Delhi High Court has directed payment of compensation from the victim compensation fund scheme even for the offense which was committed in the year 2000. So after this case, it is clear that it is immaterial as to when the offense was committed or as to when the conviction or acquittal is pronounced. The victim will have to be paid compensation from the Scheme prepared under Section 357A of the CrPC.


  1. W/P (CIVIL) No. 565/2012

  2. 2003 CriLJ 242

  3. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.139/2017

  4. CRL. A. 273/2004


Amartya Sharan, B.A.L.L.B(Hons.), specialization in energy law, 3rd-year University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun.

You can contact at https://www.linkedin.com/in/amartya-sharan-408668110

Editor: Vijayalakshmi Raju

Disclaimer by Legal Armor:

We at Legal Armor do not endorse the Author's views and are in no way responsible for the said views. We are just publishing the Write-ups as blogs with just light editing, and are in no way responsible for any legal claims. Legal Armor shall not be liable for any plagiarized content.