PARIVARTAN KENDRAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

                    [2015] 12 S.C.R. 607


                  PARIVARTAN KENDRA                             A
                              v.
              UNION OF INDIAAND OTHERS
            (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 867 of 2013)
                                                                 B
                   DECEMBER 07, 2015
         [M. Y. EQBAL AND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.]
      Constitution of India, 1950 - Art. 32 - Writ petition -
Acid attack victims - Survivor compensation schemes - Two        c
sisters of Dalit community brutal attacked with acid ·- Writ
petitionby NGO seeking enhanced compensation for sisters .
- Emphasized inadequacy of compensation payable to the
victims as per the order of this Court in the *Laxmi's case -
Lack of a legal guarantee to free medical care, rehabilitative D
services - Held: Considering the plight of the victim and in
view the impact of acid attack on the victim on their social,
economical and personal life, victim should to be awarded a
compensation more than what has been prescribed by this
Courf in the Laxmi's case - Compensation of the main victim E
enhanced from Rs 3 lakhs to Rs 10 lakhs - Her sister to be
paid to the tune of Rs 3 lakhs - Direction to the States to
implement the guidelines in Laxmi's case and include the
names of the victim in disability list- Public interest litigation.
                                                                 F
     Disposing of the writ petition, the Court

     HELD: 1.1 Considering the plight of the acid attack
victim it can be summed up that the likeliness of the victim
getting a job which involves physical exertion of energy         G
is very low; that the social stigma and the pain that she
has to go through for not being accepted by the society
cannot be neglected. Furthermore, the general reaction
of loathing which she would have to encounter and the
                                                                 H
                              607
608        SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2015] 12 S.C.R.

A humiliation that she would have to face throughout her
  life cannot be compensated in terms of money; that as a
  result of the physical. injury, the victim would not be able
  to lead a normal life and cannot dream of marriage
  prospects; and that since her skin is fragile due to the
B acid attack she would have to take care of it for the rest
  of her life. Therefore, the after care and rehabilitation cost
  that has to be incurred would have huge financiaf
  implications on her and her family. [Para 17] [623-D-G]

C          1.2 In the instant case, the Govt. of Bihar has fixed
     a pitiable amount of Rs.25,000/- for the victims of acid
     attack. The Guidelines issued by orders in the Laxmi's
   . case are proper, except with respect to the compensation
     amount. There is a need to ensure that these guidelines
 D are implemented properly. Keeping in view the impact
                                  .
     of acid attack on the victim on his social, economical
     and personal life, there is a need to enhance the amount
      of compensation. The victim of acid attack requires
      permanent treatment for the damaged skin. The. mere
 E amount of Rs. 3 lakhs would not be of any help to such
     a victim. The enhancement of the compensation amount
     would be an additional burden on the State. But
     .prevention of such a crime is the responsibility of the
 F ·State and the liability to pay the enhanced compensation
     would be of the State. The enhancement of the
     compensation would act in two ways, it would help the
      victim in rehabilitation; and it would also make the State
     to implement the guidelines properly as the State would
 G try to comply with it in its true sprit so that the crime of
      acid attack can be prevented in future. [Para 18-19] [624-
      C-G]

           1.3 In peculiar facts of the case, the victim should
      to be awarded a compensation more than what has been
 H
                      -
       PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                      609


prescribed by this Court in the Laxmi's case. Though            A
this Court is not issuing any guidelines different from
the guidelines issued in Laxmi's case. The younger sister
was also injured by the acid attack although her degree
of sufferance is not as that of the elder one, but she also
requires treatment and rehabilitation. It is to be noted that   B
this Court in Laxmi's case doesn't put a bar on the Govt.
to award compensation limited to Rs.3 Lakhs. The State
has the discretion to provide more compensation to the
victim in the case of acid attack as per Laxmi's case
guidelines. This Court has not put any condition in             C
Laxmi's case as to the degree of injuries which a victim
has suffered due to acid attack. In the instant case, the
victim's father has already spent more than Rs. 5 lakhs
for the treatment of the victim. In consideration of the
                                                                D
severity of the victim's injury, expenditure with regard to
grafting and reconstruction surgery, physical and mental
pain, etc., the victim should be compensated to a tune
of at least Rs. 10 Lakhs. The compensation must not only
be awarded in terms of the physical injury, the victim's        E
inability to lead a full life and to enjoy those amenities
which is being robbed of her as a result of the acid attack,
should be taken into consideration. Therefore, the
 concerned Government is directed to compensate the
victim to a tune of Rs. 10 Lakhs, and in light of the           F
Judgment given in Laxmi's case the concerned State
Government of Bihar is directed to compensate the main
victim's sister, to a tune of Rs. 3 Lakhs. Of the Total
 amount of Rs. 13 Lakhs, a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs would be
paid to the victim and her family within a period of one        G
month and the remaining sum of Rs. 8 lakhs would be
 paid to the victims within a period of three months from
 the date of this order. Furthermore, the State shall upon
 itself take full responsibility for the treatment and
 rehabilitation of the victims of acid attack as per the        H
610        SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 12 S.C.R.



A Guidelines provided in Laxmi's case. All the States and
      Union Territories are directed to consider the plight of
      such victims and take appropriate steps with regard to
      inclusion of their names under the disability list. [Paras
      21-22] [625-C-H; 626-A-C]
B
           *Laxmi vs. Union of India Writ Petition Crl. No.129
           of 2006, order dated 06.02.2013, 18.07.2013,
           03.12.2013; Laxmi vs. Union of India (2015) 5
           SCALE 77 - referred to.
c
                          Case law reference
      (2015) 5 SCALE 77            Referred to.             Para 21
       CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION :_Writ Petition (Civil) No.
 D 867of2013

           Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

         Pinky Anand, ASG, A. N. S. Nadkarni, C. D. Singh,
   Suryanara Singh, Colin Gonsalves, Ms. Mangla Verma, Ms.
 E Jyoti Mendiratta, Abhisth Kumar, Ma nu Yadav, Anil Shrivastav,
   Rituraj Biswas, Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Ms. Linthoingambi
   Thoncyam, B. Khushbansi, Ashok Kumar Singh, Avijit
   Bhattacharjee, Ms. Upma Shrivastava,AjoyGhosh, C. D. Singh,
   Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Gopal Singh, Ms. Vimla Sinha, Manish
 F Kumar, Guntur Prabhakar, Prerna Singh, Jagjit Singh Chhabra,
   Suksham Maheshwari, Kuldip Singh, T. L. V. Ramachari, K. V.
   L. Raghavan, Hitesh Kumar Sharma, P. V. Yogeswaran,
   Ramesh Babu M. R., Ranjan Mukherjee, T. M. Singh, Sanjay
   KumarVisen, Sun ii Fernandes, Tapesh Kumar Singh, Mohd.
 G Waquas. Shashank Singh, VG Pragasam, Ms. Aruna Mathur,
   Anuradha Arputham, (for M/s. Arputham. Aruna & Co.), Ms.
   Vartika Sahay (for M/s. Corporate Law Group), Ms. G. Indira,
   Sumit Kumar, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Jesal Wahi, Ms.
 H Vinakshi Kadan, Ms. K. Enatoli Serna, Edward Belho, Amit
        PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                         611


Kumar Singh, Anuj Sarma, Ms. Niharika, Ms. Titisha A
Mukherjee, S. S. Rebello, Anshuman Shrivastav, Pratap
Venugopal, (for Mis. K. J. John & Co.), Pragati Neekhra,
Ashutosh ·Kumar Sharma, Rachana Srivastava, Atif
Suhrawardy, Amit Sharma, lshu Prayas, S. Spandana Reddy,
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, B. V. Balramdas, D. L. Chidanand, Gaurav B
Sharma, Ms. Meenakshi Grover, Ms. Sunita Sharma, Ajay
Sharma, M. Khairati, Ms. Sushma Suri, M/s. Venkat Palwai
Law Associates, Vijendra Kasa, Chand Qureshi,Ashok Kumar
Juneja, Subramoniam TR., Mahaling Pandarge, Nishant R.
Katneshwarkar, S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Krishna Kumar Singh, C
Ms. Nupur Choudhary for the appearing parties.
      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
      M. Y. EQBAL, J.: 1. By way of present writ petition filed
 in public interest under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, D
 the petitioner- a registered NGO seeks to highlight the plight
 of the acid attack victims and the inadequacy how the
·compensation payable to the victims as per the orders of the
 Apex Court in Laxmi vs. Union of India (in Writ Petition (Crl.) E
 No.129 of 2006). Petitioner also highlights the lack of a legal
 guarantee to free medical care, rehabilitative services or
 adequate compensation under the Survivor Compensation
 Schemes.

      2. The petitioner highlighting the plight of two dalit girls of F
Bihar, who were attacked around midnight of October 21, 2012
by four assailants who threw acid on the face and bodies of
the girts while they were sleeping on their rooftops. It is alleged
that these young assailants used to harass the elder sister on
the streets, market and in the auto rickshaw while she was G
going to computer classes or to work. This victim wanted to
be a computer engineer and used to go to college regularly ·
and supported her family working as a daily wage worker.
However, these assailants used to make sexual advances H
612         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2015] 12 S.C.R.


 A towards her, pass lewd comments, and also used to pull her
   dupatta. They terrorized her and her family members by
   roaming near her house on their motorcycles, tore the curtains
   of their house and told her that if she did not heed to their
   demands and agree to have sexual relations with them they
 B would damage and destroy herface.

              3. In the aforesaid midnight, while both sisters were
      sleeping, assailantsAnil Rai, Ghanshyam Rai, Badal and Raja
      climbed upon the roof and Anil covered the elder sister's mouth
 C    so that she could not scream and Ghanshyam and Raja held
      her legs so that she could not move. When An ii Rai was pouring
      the acid on her body and face, the acid also fell on her sister's
      body and burnt her arm. After the attack, these men did not
      make any effort to flee as they wanted to stay and enjoy the
 D    moment. As the acid started burning the girls, the girls started
      screaming and crying waking up their parents, who rushed to
      the rooftop. Upon this, the assailants fled. The victims were
      rushed to the Patna Medical College and Hospital. According·
      to the petitioner, the doctors arrived only the next morning and
 E    did not give them proper treatment and the family had to buy
      all the medicines on their own. Thereafter, victims' family was
      given Rs.2,42,000/- from the Government of Bihar for the
      treatment of both. It has been contended by the petitioner that
 F    till the filing of this writ petition more than Rs. 5 lakhs had already
       been spent on their treatment and still the victims require more
       treatment.

         4. It has been submitted by the petitioner that proper and
   adequate treatment was not given to the victim. The Patna
 G Hospital waited for more than a month to conduct elder sister's
   grafting surgeries. Three grafting surgeries were performed
   on the elder sister. It is claimed that all these three surgeries
   were not performed properly and that the Hospital staff and
   doctors mistreated the victim and their family as they belonged
 H
       PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                       613
                 [M. Y. EQBAL, J.]

to a lower caste. With the help of the petitioner-Society, the A
victim was transferred to Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi on 5th April,
2013, where she finally received proper treatment. It has been
further contended by ttie petitioner that the Police also arrested
the four perpetrators a month after the attack in November,
2012 in response to intense pressure from social organizations B
and the media. On 8.2.2013, the IG of Police had made a
statement in an interview that the statement of the victim would
be taken under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
 However, according to the petitioner, no such statement had
been taken till filing of the writ petition. The victim and her C
family are, therefore, appalled by the treatment they have
 received at the hands of the Patna Hospital, the Police and
 the Government of Bihar.

       5. By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has D
sought justice, compensation and restoration of dignity of the
survivors of the acid attack, and also the assurance that these
horrific events are not repeated elsewhere. It is contended
that despite orders and directions of the Apex Court in Laxmi's
case (supra), acid is still readily available to most of the E
population in India and the acid attackers are living with
impunity, and the victims are not in a position to afford basic
care or services. Since buying acid is simple, it is being used
to settle most minor disputes. An acid attack survivor needs
surgeries throughout his/her lifetime with each surgery costing F
around Rs.3 lakhs. It has been further pleaded by the petitioner
that this crime is mainly committed in four countries of the world,
namely, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Cambodia and India. All the
other three countries have engaged in paving the way to an G
effective remedy for the survivors of the victims. Petitioner
contends that Bangladesh passed a law in 2002, which is much
stronger law than the Indian Law as Indian Law neither
effectively address the gravity of acid attacks nor does it ·
adequately help the acid attack survivors.                          H
614       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2015] 12 S.C.R.


A        6. The petitioner submits that the failure of the States to
  provide compensation under Survivor Compensation
  Schemes have caused the survivors to be isolated from all
  sections of society as they are unable to leave their house
  because of their disfigurements. The compensation of Rs. 3
B Lakh does not cover the entire expenses incurred by an acid
  attack victim. The petitioner further contends that the Union of
  India has not developed any standard treatment and
  management guidelines; public health facilities etc., to treat
  acid attack victims. The petitioner has sought development of
C comprehensive rehabilitation scheme for acid attack survivors
  i.e., housing, education and employment.

        7. The petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of
  mandamus to the State of Bihar to reimburse Rs. 5 lakh to the
D victim's family which is the amount spent on her treatment so
  far and for any other expenditure incurred on the treatment of
  the minor sister, and to provide compensation of at least Rs.10
  Lakhs to the victims' family in lieu of their pain and suffering.
  The petitioner has also inter alia prayed for issuance of writ of
E mandamus or directions to develop a standard treatment and
  management guidelines for the treatment and handling of acid
  attack victims by constituting a panel of experts: to direct all
  private hospitals to provide free treatment in acid attack cases
F and to have pictorial displays with the first aid and primary
  care protocols and guidelines to neutralize the acid and
  stabilize the survivor in the all Public Health Centres, sub-
  centres and government hospitals. Petitioner has also prayed
  for inclusion of acid attacks in the Scheduled Castes and
G Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and to reform
  educationi:ll programs in primary school to understand the
  gravity of violence against women.

      8. We have heard Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned senior
H counsel appearing for the petitioner, and learned counsel
        PARIVARTAN·KENDRA v. UNION OF !NOIA                              615
                  [M. Y EQBAL, J.]

appearing for the Union of India, State of Bihar and other States.       A

      9. Before we proceed further, we would like to go through
the orders passed by the Apex Court in the case of WP (CrL)
No. 129 of 2006 titled as Laxmi vs. Union of India, dealing
with a similar case of acid attack victim. On 18.07.2013, this           B
Court passed the following order:

      "6. The Centre and States/Union Territories shall work
      towards making the offences under the Poison Act, 1919
      cognizable and non-bailable.
                                                                         c
      7. In the States/Union Territories, where rules to regulate
      sale of acid and other corrosive substances are not
      operational, until such rules are framed and made
      operational, the Chief Secretaries of the concerned
      States/Administrators of the Union Territories shall               D
      ensure the compliance of the following directions with
      immediate effect:
      (i) Over the counter, sale of acid is completely prohibited
      unless the seller maintains a log/register recording the            E
      sale of acid which will contain the details of the person(s)
      to whom acid(s) is/are sold and the quantity sold. The
      log/register shall contain the address of the person to
      whom it is sold.
      (ii) All sellers shall sell acid only after the buyer has shown:    F
         a) a photo ID issued by the Government which also
         has the address of the person.
         b) specifies the reason/purpose for procuring acid.
      (iii) All stocks of acid must be declared by the seller with        G
      the concerned Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SOM) within
      15 days.
      (iv) No acid shall be sold to any person who is below 18
      years of age.                                                       H
616   SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 12 S.C.R.



A     (v) In case of undeclared stock of acid, it will be open to
      the concerned SOM to confiscate the stock and suitably
      impose fine on such seller up to Rs. 50,000/-
      (vi) The concerned SOM may impose fine up
      to Rs. 50,000/- on any person who commits breach of
B
      any of the above directions.
      8. The educational institutions, research laboratories,
      hospitals, Government Departments and the
      departments of Public Sector Undertakings, who are
c     required to keep and store acid, shall follow the following
      guidelines:
      (i) A register of usage of acid shall be maintained and
      the same shall be filed with the concerned SOM.
D     (ii) A person shall be made accountable for possession
      and safe keeping of acid in their premises.
      (iii) The acid shall be stored under the supervision of this
      person and there shall be compulsory checking of the
      students/personnel leaving the laboratories/place of
E
      storage where acid is used.
      9. The concerned SOM sh.all be vested with the
      responsibility of taking appropriate action for the breach/
      default/violation of the above directions.
F
      10. Section 357 A came to inserted in the Code of
      Criminal Procedure, 1973 by Act 5 of 2009 w.e.f.
      31.12.2009. Inter alia, this Section provides for
      preparation of a scheme for providing funds for the
      purpose of compensation to the victim or his dependents
G
      who have suffered loss or injury as a result of the crime
      and who require rehabilitation.
      11. We are informed that pursuant to this provision, 17
      States and 7 Union Territories have prepared 'Victim
H     Compensation Scheme' (for short "Scheme"). As
        PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                         617
                  [M. Y. EQBAL, J.]

      regards the victims of acid attacks the compensation A
      mentioned in the Scheme framed by these States
      andUnion Territories is 1.m-uniform. While the State of
      Bihar has provided for compensation of Rs. 25,000/- in
      such scheme, the State of Rajasthan has provided
      for Rs. 2 lakhs of compensation. In our view, the B
      compensation provided in the Scheme by most of tile
      States/Union Territories is inadequate. It cannot be
      overlooked that acid attack victims need to undergo a
      series of plastic surgeries and other corrective
      treatments. Having regard to this problem, learned C
      Solicitor Ger::.ral suggested to us that the compensation
      by the States/Union Territories for acid attack victims
      must be enhanced to at least Rs. 3 lakhs as the after care
      and rehabilitation cost. The suggestion of learned D
      Solicitor General is very fair.
      12. We, accordingly, direct that the acid attack victims
      shall be paid compensation of at least ' 3 lakhs by the
      concerned State Government/Union Territory as the after
      care and rehabilitation cost. Of this amount, a sum           E
      of Rs. 1 lakh shall be paid to such victim within 15 days
      of occurrence of such incident (or being brought to tl:"le
      notice of the State Government/ Union Territory) to
      facilitate immediate medical attention and expenses in
      this regard. The balance sum of' 2 lakhs shall be paid        F
      as expeditiously as may be possible and positively within
      two months thereafter. The Chief Secretaries of the
      States and the Administrators of the Union Territories
      shall ensure compliance of the above direction."
           ~                                                        G
      10. On 3rd December, 2013, in Laxmi's case (supra),
when the affidavit of State of Haryana was placed before the
Bench, in which it stated that the Government of Haryana is in
the process of framing a scheme for full medical treatment,
short term as well as long term, for specialised plastic surgery,   H
618        SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 12S.C.R.


A  corrective surgeries, providing specialised psychological
   treatment to the acid victims to help them to come out of the
   horror and trauma of the acid attack and their rehabilitation,
   this Court directed the Chief Secretaries of the States (other
   than Haryana) and the administrators of the Union Territories
 B to file affidavit and indicate to this Court, the State's view in
   bearing 100% cost of treatment of the acid victims in line with
   the decision taken by the Government of Haryana and also
   with regard to framing of scheme on the lines of Haryana
   Government for medical treatment at specialised hospitals
 C having facility for plastic surgery, corrective surgery and
    psychological as well as other treatment to the acid victims.
    This Court further directed the Chief Secretaries of the States
    and Administrators of the Union Territories to issue
    necessary instructions to the Police Stations within their
 0
    respective State/Union Territory that as and when an FIR is
    lodged with the police relating to acid attack, the concerned
    Police Station will send a communication to the jurisdictional
    S.D.M. about receipt of such information. Upon receipt of such
 E information, the jurisdictional S.D.M. shall then make inquiry
    into the procurement of acid by the wrong doer and take
    appropriate action in the matter.

          11. While disposing of the writ petition of Laxmi versus
      Union oflndia, this Court inter alia held, thus:-
 F
           "10. We have gone through the chart annexed along with
           the affidavit filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs and we
           find that despite the directions given by this Court
           in Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) 4 SCC 427], the
 G         minimum compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees three
           lakhs only) per acid attack victim has not been fixed in
           some of the States/Union Territories. In our opinion, it will
           be appropriate if the Member Secretary of the State
            Legal Services Authority takes up the issue with the State
  H         Government so that the orders passed by this Court are
  PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                       619
            [M. Y. EQBAL, J.]

complied with and a minimum of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees A
three lakhs only) is made available to each victim
of acid attack.    ·
11. From the figures given above, we find that the amount
will not be burdensome so far as the State Governments/
                                                          8
Union Territories are concerned and, therefore, we do
not see any reason why the directions given by this Court
should not be accepted by the State Governments/
Union Territories since they do not involve any serious
financial implication.                                    c
                       )()()()()()()()


13. Insofar as the proper treatment, aftercare and
rehabilitation of the victims of acid attack is concerned,
the meeting convened on 14.03.2015 notes unanimously D
that full medical assistance should be provided to the
victims of acid attack and that private hospitals should
also provide free medical treatment to such victims. It is
noted that there may perhaps be some reluctance on
the part of some private hospitals to provide free medical E
treatment and, therefore, the concerned officers in the
State Governments should take up the matter with the
private hospitals so that they are also required to provide
free medical treatment to the victims of acid attack.
14. The decisions taken in the meeting read as follows:     F
• The private hospitals will also be brought on board for
compliance and the States/UTs will use necessary means
in this regard.
• No hospital/clinic should refuse treatment citing lack of G
specialized facilities.
• First-aid must be administered to the victim and after
stabilization, the victim/patient could be shifted to a. ·
specialized facility for further treatment, wherever H
620   SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2015] 12 S.C.R.


A     required.
      •Action may be taken against hospital/clinic for refusal
      to treat victims of acid attacks and other crimes in
      contravention of the provisions of Section 357C of the
      Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
 B
                                )()()()()()()(


      17. We, therefore, issue a direction that the State
      Governments/Union Territories should seriously discuss
      and take up the matter with all the private hospitals in
 c    their respective State/Union Territory to the effect that the.
      private hospitals should not refuse treatment to victims
      of acid attack and that full treatment should be provided
      to such victims including medicines, food, bedding and
      reconstructive surgeries.
 D
      18. We also issue a direction that the hospital, where
      the victim of an acid attack is first treated, should give a
      certificate that the individual is a victim of an acid attack.
      This certificate may be utilized by the victim for treatment
 E    and reconstructive surgeries or any other scheme that
      the victim may be entitled to with the State Government
      or the Union Territory, as the case may be.
      19. In the event of any specific complaint against any
 F    private hospital or government hospital,
      the acid attack victim will, of course, be at liberty to take
      further action.
      20. With regard to the banning of sale of acid across the
      counter, we direct the Secretary in the Ministry of Home
 G    Affairs and Secretary in the Ministry of Health and Family
      Welfare to take up the matter with the State Governments/
      Union Territories to ensure that an appropriate
      notification to this effect is issued within a period of three
      months from today. It appears that some States/Union
 H
         PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                       621
                   [M. Y. EQBAL. J.]

       Territories have already issued such a notification, but, A
       in our opinion, all States and Union Territories must issue
       such a notification at the earliest.
       21. The final issue is with regard to the setting up of a
       Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. In the meeting B
       held on 14.03.2015, the unanimous view was that since
       the District Legal Services Authority is already constituted
       in every district and is involved in providing appropriate
       assistance relating to acid attack victims, perhaps it may
       not be necessary to set up a separate Criminal Injuries c
       Compensation Board. In other words, a multiplicity of
       authorities need not be created.
       22. In our opinion, this view is quite reasonable.
       Therefore, in case of any compensation claim made by
       any acid attack victim, the matter will be taken up by the D
       District Legal Services Authority, which will include the
       District Judge and such other co-opted persons who the
       District Judge feels will be of assistance, particularly the
       District Magistrate, the Superintendent of Police and the
       Civil Surgeon or the Chief Medical Officer of that District E
       or their nominee. This body will function as the Criminal
       Injuries Compensation Board for all purposes."
         12. The above mentioned direction given by this Court
. in Laxmi's case (supra) is a general mandate to the State and F
  Union Territory and is the minimum amount which the State
  shall make available to each victim of acid attack. The State
  and Union Territory concerned can give even r:nore amount of
  compensation than Rs. 3, 00, 0001- as directed by this Court. It
  is pertinent to mention here that the mandate given by this Court G
  in Laxmi's case nowhere restricts the Court from giving more
  compensation to the victim of acid attack, especially when the
  victim has suffered serious injuries on her body which is
 required to be taken into consideration by this court. In peculiar
                                                                   H
622        SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2015] 12 S.C.R.


/.1 facts, this court can grant even more compensation to the
    victim than Rs. 3,00,000/-.

          13. We have come across many instances of acid attacks
   across the country. These attacks have been rampant for the
 B simple reason that there has been no proper implementation
   of the regulations or control for the supply and distribution of
   acid. There have been many cases where the victims of acid
   attack are made to sit at home owing to their difficulty to work.
   These instances unveil that the State has failed to check the
 C distribution of acid falling into the wrong hands even after giving
   many directions by this Court in this regard. Henceforth, a
   stringent action be taken against those erring persons
   supplying acid without proper authorization and also the
   concerned authorities be made responsible for failure to keep
 D a check on the distribution of the acid.

         14. When we consider the instant case of the victims,
   the very sight of the victim is traumatizing for us. If we could
   be traumatized by the mere sight of injuries caused to the victim
 E by the inhumane acid attack on her, what would be the situation
   of the victim be, perhaps, we cannot judge. Nonetheless we
   cannot be oblivious of the fact of her trauma.

         15. From perusal of the record of the case, it is found
 F that elder sister suffered 28 % burns on her body and 90% on
   her face, owing to the alleged brutal attack on her. Due to the
   acid attack, the victim_ had undergone several surgeries, and
   has to undergo_ many more corrective and curative surgeries
   for her treatment.
 G
          16. Admittedly, three skin grafting surgeries were
   conducted by the PMCH but they were all improperly conducted
    as testified at Sarfdarjung Hospital. The victim, was brought
    to Delhi by the petitioner and in Delhi 'Some skin grafting
 H surgeries were again conducted at the Sarfdarjung Hospital
          PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                      623
                    [M. Y. EQBAL, J.]

 for Neck, Lips, Eyes, Nose, Arm, Forehead and Ear. Further A
 skin grafting surgeries were also conducted at Fortis Hospital
 for Neck, Lips, Nose, Eye and Arm. In the opinion of victim's
 doctor also, she would be required to undergo multiple
·corrective and curative operations and medical support for the
 rest of her life. Victim would be required to have corrective B
 and curative surgeries for Neck, Lips, Eyes, Nose, Arm,
 Forehead, Ears, Breasts and Elbow. Apart from the above
 medical conditions/treatment, which she is required to
 undergo, there are many other consequences, which an acid
 attack brings out in the life of the victim.                   C

        17. Considering the plight of the victim we can sum up
that:
         * the likeliness of the victim getting a job which involves 0
            physical exertion of energy is very low.
         * the social stigma and the pain that she has to go
           through for not being accepted by the society cannot
           be neglected. Furthermore, the general reaction of
           loathing which she would have to encounter and the E
           humiliation that she would have to face throu~out
           her life cannot be compensated in terms of money.
         * as a result of the physical injury, the victim will not be
           able to lead a normal life and cannot dream of F
           marriage prospects.
         * since her skin is fragile due to the acid attack she
           would have to take care of it for the rest of her life.
           Therefore_. the after care and rehabilitation cost that
           has to be incurred will have hu'ge financial implications G
           on her and her family.
       18. On perusal of various contentions and evidence, we
find it imperative to mention that even after this Court having
passed an order dated 06.02.2013 directing the Union of India H
624        SUPREME COURT REPORTS                       [2015) 12 S.C.R.


A  and States to implement compensation payable to acid attack
   victims by creation of a separate fund, only 17 States have
   been notified of the Victim Compensation Schemes (VSC).
   Out of which 7 states and 4 Union territories have not initiated
   the VSC. Even in those States where the Scheme has been
 B implemented a meager compensation ranging between
   Rs.25,000/- to Rs. 2 lakhs is provided for medical c~re. And
   many States have not provided any compensation for
   rehabilitation at all. In the present case, the Govt. of Bihar has
   fixed a pitiable amount of Rs.25,000/- for the victims of acid
 C attack.

         19. The Guidelines issued by orders in the Laxmi's case
   are proper, except with respect to the compensation amount.
   We just need to ensure that these guidelines are implemented
 D properly. Keeping in view the impact of acid attack on the
   victim on his social, economical and personal life, we need to
   enhance the amount of compensation. We cannot be oblivious
   of the fact that the victim of acid attack requires permanent
   treatment for the damaged skin. The mere amount of Rs. 3
 E lakhs will not be of any help to such a victim. We are conscious
   of the fact that enhancement of the compensation amount will
   be an additional burden on the State. But prevention of Sbl.((.h a
   crime is the responsibility of the State and the liability to pay
 F the enhanced compensation will be of the State. The
   enhancement of the Compensation will act in two ways:-

           1. It will help the victim in rehabilitation;

           2. It will also make the State to implement the guidelines
 G         properly as the State will try to comply with it in its true
           sprit so that the crime of acid attack can be prevented in
           future.

         20. Having regard to the problems faced by the victims,
 H this Court in the case of Laxmi v. Union of India & Ors by an
        PARIVARTAN KENDRA v. UNION OF INDIA                           625
                  [M. Y. EQBAL, J.]

order dated 18. 07. 2013, enhanced the compensation, stating          A
that, "at least Rs.3 Lakhs must be paid to the victims of acid
attacks by the concerned Government". Therefore, a minimum
of Rs.3 Lakhs is to be awarded by the Government to each
victim of acid attack. In the present case, a minimum amount
of Rs. 6 Lakhs has to be awarded to the sisters.                      B

       21 :ln peculiar facts of the case, we are of the view that
victim Chanchal deserves to be awarded a compensation more
than what has been prescribed by this Court in the Laxmi's
case (supra). Though in this case we are not issuing any              C
guidelines different from the guidelines issued in Laxmi's case,
we should not forget that the younger sister was also injured
 by the acid attack. Although her degree of sufferaDce is not
as that of the elder one, but she also requires treatment and
rehabilitation. It is to be noted that this Court in Laxmi's case     D
(supra) doesn't put a bar on the Govt. to award compensation
limited to Rs.3 Lakhs. The State has the discretion to provide
more compensation to the victim in the case of acid attack as
per Laxmi's case guidelines. It is also to be noticed that this
Court has not put any condition in Laxmi's case as to the             E
degree of injuries which a victim has suffered due to acid attack.
In the instant case, the victim's father has already spent more
than Rs. 5 lakhs for the treatment of the victim. In cor1sideration
of the severity of the victim's injury, expenditure with regard to
grafting and reconstruction surgery, physical and mental pain,        F
etc., we are of the opinion that the victim (Chanchal) should be
compensated to a tune of at least Rs. 10 Lakhs. Suffice it to
say that the compensation must not only be awarded in terms
of the physical injury, we have also to take note of victim's         G
inability to lead a full life and to enjoy those amenities which is
being robbed of her as a result of the acid attack. Therefore,
this Court deems it proper to award a compensation of Rs. 10
lakhs and accordingly, we direct the concerned Government
to compensate the victim Chanchal to a tune of Rs. 10 Lakhs,          H
    62t)         SUPREME COURT REPORTS               .[2015] 12 S.C.R.


     A and in light of the Judgment given in Laxmi's case we direct
       the concerned State Government of Bihar to compensate the
       main victim's sister, Sonam to a tune of Rs. 3 Lakhs. Of the
       Total amount of Rs. 13 Lakhs, a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs shall be
       paid to the victim and her family within a period of one month
     B and the remaining sum of Rs. 8 lakhs shall be paid to the victims
       within a period of three months from the date of this order.
       Furthermore, the State shall upon itself take full responsibility
       for the treatment and rehabilitation of the victims of acid attack
       as per the Guidelines provided in Laxmi's case, (2015) 5
'    C SCALE 77, vide order dated 10.4.2015.

             22. Disposing of the present writ petition, we additionally
       direct all the States and Union Territories to consider the plight
       of such victims and take appropriate steps with regard to
     D inclusion of their names under the disability list.

           NidhiJain                                Writ petition disposed of.