E-Paper
Supreme Court orders strict timeline for acid attack trials
The Supreme Court on Monday passed orders asking high courts across the country to set strict timelines for early completion of acid attack trials
The Supreme Court on Monday passed orders asking high courts across the country to set strict timelines for early completion of acid attack trials, even as it directed states and Union territories to come up with policies to ensure victims of such crimes are provided preference in government jobs.
The direction came in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by an acid attack survivor, whose case has been pending trial since 2009. In December, the top court had requested all high courts to provide information on the pendency of acid attack trials under their jurisdiction.
On Sunday, a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “We request high courts to fix a timeline for trial courts.”
Going through the reports filed by various high courts, the court said it was “disappointed” with the pendency of almost 160 cases in West Bengal as reported by the Calcutta High Court. Further, a significant number of pending trials were also reported from Uttar Pradesh.
Most high courts informed the top court that circulars have been issued to all trial courts under them for expeditious disposal of acid attack cases. The CJI-led bench further said, “Let the portfolio judge or administrative judge monitor that such circulars are meticulously complied by trial courts.” The high courts were requested to file reports updating the steps taken for the speedy conclusion of trials.
The bench also directed all states and UTs to provide information on welfare schemes available to acid attack victims. “All states and UTs will show cause as to why a scheme for rehabilitation through employment in government or government-controlled sectors for victims of acid attacks be not directed to be formulated by them,” the order said.
If the states/UTs face logical issues in providing such preference to acid attack victims, the court directed them to file a proposal for paying honorarium in the form of subsistence allowance to such victims.
Posting the matter next month, the court sought assistance of a senior advocate from the panel of Supreme Court Legal Services Committee (SCLSC) to compile data from reports of each state/UT with regard to the total incidents, compliance of victim compensation scheme and existence of rehabilitation schemes for acid attack victims.
