Acid Attack Is Gender-Based Violence: Allahabad High Court While Reducing Life Term to 14 Years
While upholding conviction under IPC Sections 304, 326A and 452, the high court said acid attacks largely target women and cause lasting physical and psychological harm
The Allahabad High Court observed that acid attacks in India predominantly target women and girls while modifying the sentence of a convict in a Pratapgarh double-murder case.
"Acid attacks in India predominantly target women and young girls and have become a form of gender-based violence,” the Allahabad High Court observed, while partly allowing a criminal appeal in a double-murder case arising from an acid attack in Pratapgarh district.
While upholding the conviction of appellant Jagdamba Harijan, the bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary reduced the life sentence imposed by the trial court to a fixed term of 14 years’ rigorous imprisonment.
Court emphasised that acid attacks predominantly target women and young girls and are usually perpetrated by men, making the crime a form of gender-based violence. Referring to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Suresh Chandra Jana vs State of West Bengal and Others (2017), the bench noted that acid attacks not only disfigure victims but also inflict severe psychological trauma, often becoming a serious obstacle in their overall development and rehabilitation in society.
According to the prosecution case, the incident occurred around 2:00 AM on the intervening night of May 7–8, 2014. The complainant Dinesh Verma was sleeping outside his house when he heard screams from inside. When he rushed in, he found his mother Phoolan Devi and sister-in-law Suman Devi lying on a cot with acid thrown on their faces and bodies.
The complainant stated that in torchlight he saw the appellant Jagdamba Harijan at the scene carrying a stick, accompanied by another unidentified person whose face was covered. When he attempted to chase them, the appellant allegedly struck him with the stick and fled from the spot.
Evidence before the court indicated that the accused had earlier harassed Suman Devi and had threatened her husband. The prosecution relied on the testimony of eyewitnesses including the complainant and his brother, along with medical and forensic evidence.
Both victims were initially taken to local hospitals and later shifted to S.R.N. Hospital in Allahabad due to the severity of their injuries. Suman Devi died on May 22, 2014 and Phoolan Devi died on May 29, 2014. Post-mortem examinations confirmed that their deaths were caused by septicemia resulting from deep burn injuries caused by acid.
During trial, the prosecution examined eight witnesses including eyewitnesses, doctors who conducted the post-mortems, and the investigating officer. Forensic reports also confirmed the presence of sulphuric acid on seized materials from the scene of the crime.
The counsel for the appellant argued that the FIR was delayed, that the eyewitnesses were unreliable, and that the deaths were due to septicemia possibly arising from inadequate medical treatment rather than the attack itself. The appellant also questioned the identification of the accused and alleged discrepancies in witness testimony.
Rejecting these arguments, the high court held that the delay in lodging the FIR was reasonably explained since the priority of the family was to arrange urgent medical treatment for the severely injured victims. It also found the eyewitness testimony credible and supported by medical and forensic evidence.
Court further held that septicemia in the present case was a direct consequence of the acid burn injuries and therefore could not break the causal link between the attack and the victims’ deaths.
While affirming the conviction under Sections 304, 326A and 452 of the IPC [corresponding to Sections 105, 124(1) and 331(4) of the BNS respectively], court considered that the appellant had already spent over 13 years in custody and had no criminal history. Balancing the gravity of the offence with the possibility of reformation, the bench modified the punishment.
Accordingly, court reduced the life sentence to a fixed term of 14 years’ rigorous imprisonment while maintaining the conviction and fines imposed by the trial court, and directed that the appellant be released only after completing the said sentence if he is not required in any other case.
Case Title: Jagdamba Harijan v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Order Date: 12 February 2026
Bench: Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary