Acid attack victims entitled to compensation, medical aid, rehab under PWD Act: Bombay HC

The bench also directed the secretary of the Mumbai District Legal Services Authority to assist her in securing disability registration and availing further compensation under the NALSA Scheme, the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund and the Central Victim Compensation Fund Guidelines, 2016.

Emphasising that acid attack victims are entitled to additional compensation, rehabilitative measures and free medical treatment also available to persons with disabilities under provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (PWD) Act, 2016, over and above the compensation paid to victims of violent crimes, the Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra government to pay compensation of ₹10 lakh to an acid attack victim from Mumbai. The court also ordered the state government to pay the compensation amount within a stipulated time period of three months.

In March this year, the petitioner approached the Bombay high court, seeking compensation under the state’s Manodhairya Scheme, claiming that she had incurred expenditure of about ₹5 lakh for her treatment, but didn’t get any relief from the state government. (HT PHOTO.)

The division bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Madhav Jamdar directed the government to deposit 75℅ of the compensation amount in fixed deposit and credit the balance amount to her individual savings account.

The bench also directed the secretary of the Mumbai District Legal Services Authority to assist her in securing disability registration and availing further compensation under the NALSA Scheme, the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund and the Central Victim Compensation Fund Guidelines, 2016.

Besides, the secretary has also been ordered to ensure that free medical treatment, including reconstructive surgeries, and rehabilitative measures, on the lines of PWDs, are provided to her.

The petitioner, a Dahisar East resident and mother of two, was assaulted by her husband. In the early hours of November 24, 2010, while she was asleep her husband poured some boiling, inflammable corrosive substance on her face and body, resulting in 70 to 80℅ superficial to deep burn injuries and disfigurement of face and other parts of the body.

In March this year, she approached the high court through advocates Aditi Saxena and Rachita Padwal, seeking compensation under the state’s Manodhairya Scheme, claiming that she had incurred expenditure of about ₹5 lakh for her treatment, but didn’t get even a penny from the state government. She also sought additional compensation for undergoing further corrective surgeries, for she was unable to wear corrective spectacles for her eye defect, as both her outer ears were damaged.

While allowing her claim, the Bombay High Court took into consideration not only section 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code, but also of the PWD Act.

The court noted that the term “specified disability” is defined under section 2(zc) of the PWD Act to mean the disabilities specified in the schedule to the Act. The schedule, in turn, specifies the disability in terms of physical disability, visual impairment, hearing impairment etc. and the category of “physical disability” includes acid attack victim - a person disfigured due to violent assaults by throwing acid or similar corrosive substance.

“Therefore, an acid attack victim would be construed to be a person suffering from specified disability,” said the bench and held that the petitioner was entitled to all additional benefits available to PWDs, apart from compensation from the state government.

The high court said section 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code mandates criminal courts to determine and order payment of just compensation, but unfortunately in case of the petitioner the trial court did not direct payment of just compensation to her.

“This is really an unfortunate case. The petitioner’s right to lead a meaningful life, a life with dignity, within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution of India remains a distant dream,” said the bench. “In such circumstances, the writ court will be failing in its duty if it does not direct payment of just compensation to the petitioner, as well as rehabilitation measures for the petitioner,” it added.