Acid Attack Convicts Denied Bail: Supreme Court Reinforces Justice for Survivors
The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark ruling in Shivani Tyagi v. State of U.P. & Anr., addressing the crucial issue of granting bail to convicts in heinous crimes. The case, concerning an acid attack survivor, questioned whether financial compensation could be a valid ground for suspending a life sentence and granting bail. In a strongly worded judgment, the Court overturned the bail granted to the convicts and emphasized that crimes like acid attacks warrant strict punishment without exceptions.
Background of the Case
The case originates from a brutal acid attack on the appellant, Shivani Tyagi, who suffered severe burns and permanent disfigurement. She was 31 years old at the time of the attack and suffered 30-40% deep burns on her face, chest, and hands due to sulfuric acid.
The accused were found guilty of committing an offense under Sections 307/149 and 326A/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deal with attempted murder and grievous hurt through acid attacks. The trial court sentenced the convicts to life imprisonment. However, the Allahabad High Court later suspended the sentence and granted them bail on the condition that they pay Rs. 25 lakh to the victim.
This decision was challenged by the victim in the Supreme Court, raising fundamental concerns regarding justice, deterrence, and the role of financial compensation in serious offenses.
Arguments by the Appellant (Shivani Tyagi)
- The appellant argued that the High Court failed to consider the gravity of the offense and its lifelong impact on the victim.
- She contended that the bail order was based on extraneous factors, particularly the financial compensation offered by the accused, rather than on legal principles.
- She emphasized that acid attacks not only cause physical and psychological trauma but also severely affect the victim’s social and economic standing.
- The appellant further argued that such offenses required strict sentencing to serve as a deterrent, and granting bail merely on financial considerations set a dangerous precedent.
Arguments by the Respondents (State of U.P. and Convicts)
- The State of U.P. did not oppose the bail, stating that the convicts had already spent a significant period in prison.
- The convicts contended that they had voluntarily offered Rs. 25 lakh as compensation, which should be considered a humanitarian gesture.
- They also argued that since their appeal against conviction was pending and the trial had been delayed, they should be released on bail.
Key Observations of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court delivered a detailed judgment, outlining multiple reasons why the High Court’s decision was flawed:
- The Court ruled that monetary compensation cannot be a basis for granting bail in heinous crimes like acid attacks.
- It emphasized that acid attacks permanently strip victims of their basic human rights and cause irreversible damage.
- The Court noted that granting bail in such cases could embolden criminals and undermine deterrence.
- It reaffirmed that the mandate under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) requires an objective assessment of all factors before suspending a sentence.
- The Court cited State of Haryana v. Hasmat and Kishori Lal v. Rupa & Ors., which held that granting bail in serious offenses requires careful judicial scrutiny and reasoning.
Supreme Court’s Verdict
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s bail order and directed the convicts to surrender within four days, stating:
“The impugned order is infected with non-application of mind and non-consideration of the relevant factors despite the fact that the case involved an acid attack on a young woman resulting in permanent disfiguration.”
It further noted:
“An acid attack may completely strip off the victim of her basic human right to live a decent life. In such cases, serious consideration of all parameters should be made before granting bail.”
The Court also held that if the convicts failed to surrender within the stipulated time, law enforcement should re-arrest them immediately.
Impact of the Judgment
The ruling has far-reaching consequences:
- It sets a precedent that financial compensation cannot substitute criminal punishment.
- The judgment serves as a deterrent against heinous crimes like acid attacks, ensuring that perpetrators face the full extent of the law.
- It reinforces the judiciary’s role in upholding victims’ rights and ensuring justice is served.
- The decision underscores the importance of strict sentencing in cases involving gender-based violence.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s verdict in Shivani Tyagi v. State of U.P. & Anr. is a landmark judgment that strengthens the legal framework against acid attacks. By overturning the bail granted to the convicts, the Court has reaffirmed that justice must be served without compromise. The ruling sends a strong message that heinous crimes cannot be mitigated by financial settlements and that victims’ rights will be fiercely protected.
Read also: https://judgmentlibrary.com/supreme-court-cancels-bail-of-accused-in-ghaziabad-murder-case/
This decision reinforces the principle that justice is not for sale and that the rule of law must prevail over monetary inducements.
Petitioner Name: Shivani Tyagi.Respondent Name: State of U.P. & Anr..Judgment By: Justice C.T. Ravikumar, Justice Rajesh Bindal.Place Of Incident: Uttar Pradesh.Judgment Date: 05-04-2024.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: shivani-tyagi-vs-state-of-u.p.-&-anr.-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-05-04-2024.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by C.T. Ravikumar
See all petitions in Judgment by Rajesh Bindal
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments April 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments
See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
