More Than 10 Yrs Delay in Acid Attack Trial: Supreme Court Calls It a “Mockery of the Legal System”

The Court issued notice on Mallik’s Public Interest Litigation seeking systemic reforms, stronger safeguards, and faster trials for acid attack cases.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard the matter, with Mallik; who survived a brutal acid attack in 2009, appearing in person. She told the Court that despite the attack taking place 15 years ago, the case had not progressed meaningfully for a decade.

“In 2009, the attack took place and till 2019 nothing happened. I had lost all hope in law and justice,” Malik said. She added that she regained the courage to continue her legal fight only after a Judicial Officer, Parvinder Kaur (currently a District Judge), who helped revive her case. Mallik informed the Court that the matter is currently at the stage of final arguments before a Rohini District Court and no conviction has been secured so far.

Reacting sharply, CJI Kant questioned how a case involving such brutality could be allowed to drift without conclusion for over a decade. “What a mockery of the legal system! This is such a shame. What is happening in the national capital? If the national capital cannot handle this, then who will?” he remarked.

The Chief Justice said the Court would direct day-to-day hearings to ensure completion of the trial. He further advised Mallik to file an application in the pending PIL so that her individual case could be taken up under judicial supervision.

Appearing in the courtroom, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta supported the PIL. He said that acid attack survivors; especially those forced to ingest acid, must be recognised as persons with disabilities under the relevant legislation. “I don’t think any respondent can oppose this. It should be treated as disability. They should be considered in the Act,” he said.

Malik told the Bench that women forced to drink acid face far more severe consequences, often requiring artificial food pipes and suffering lifelong immobility. Expressing horror, CJI Kant said, “I knew about acid attacks, but feeding acid? I was unaware. I wonder how a person even survives. It’s horrible.”

The Bench indicated that the Court would consider the creation of a special court for acid attack cases nationwide. “We will consider having a special court for all this,” the CJI said.

Solicitor General Mehta added that the incident involving Mallik occurred in Haryana and suggested that the State be impleaded as a respondent. The Bench agreed and directed her to file an appropriate application.

The Court issued notice in the PIL and asked the Registrar Generals of all High Courts to furnish complete details of all pending trials involving acid attack victims. “Let us get the details also,” CJI Kant directed, signalling the Court’s intent to take a broader, systemic view of the problem.

During the hearing, Advocate Sija Nair appeared for the petitioner. 

The petition stresses that a disability certificate under the RPwD Act is a mandatory prerequisite for accessing financial assistance, rehabilitation, and welfare schemes notified by states. Due to the narrow definition, victims of acid ingestion cannot obtain these certificates and are effectively denied critical state support for recovery.