Acid attacks affect victims both externally and internally, yet legal protection has often been skewed towards visible injury. Critically analyse India's legal framework for acid attack victims.

Q. Acid attacks affect victims both externally and internally, yet legal protection has often been skewed towards visible injury. Critically analyse India's legal framework for acid attack victims. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Acid violence maims twice — through visible disfigurement and through internal organ damage from forced ingestion. India's framework has punished the act broadly but recognised the injury narrowly, a gap only closed by the May 2026 amendment to the Schedule of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016 [2].

The three layers of protection - Criminal law: BNS Section 124 penalises grievous hurt by throwing or administering acid — 10 years to life, with fine meeting the victim's medical expenses [3]. - Regulatory and compensatory: Laxmi v. Union of India (2013) directed regulation of over-the-counter acid sale under Model Poisons Rules and a minimum ₹3 lakh compensation in every State/UT [4]. - Welfare law: the RPwD Act, 2016 lists acid attack victims as a specified disability, unlocking certification, reservation in government jobs and higher education, and scheme benefits [1].

Where the skew lay - The Act's Schedule originally covered only persons disfigured "by throwing of acid" — survivors of forced ingestion, injured internally without outer scarring, were denied disability certificates [1][2]. - A statutory asymmetry resulted: criminal law recognised administration of acid as an offence, while the welfare statute did not recognise its victim [1][3]. - The harm is gendered and often intra-household, making invisible injury doubly under-reported.

The correction and residual gaps - The notified amendment now covers disfigurement "externally or internally" by throwing, administering or spilling, and applies retrospectively [2]. - Yet it came through judicial direction and delegated legislation, not legislative review — reform remains reactive; Schedule-based statutes need periodic syncing with criminal law. - Implementation gaps persist in acid-sale enforcement, certification capacity and timely compensation [4].

The framework has moved from punishing the attack to recognising the whole injury. Institutionalising periodic review of the Schedule, standardising medical certification for internal injuries, and strengthening State compliance with sale-regulation and compensation directions would align it fully with the RPwD Act's promise of dignity and equality.

(~305 words)

Sources: 1. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (India Code) — Schedule listing acid attack victims as a specified disability; reservation and certification entitlements 2. Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment — amendment to the Schedule of the RPwD Act, 2016 dated 22.05.2026 — revised "acid attack victim" definition covering internal disfigurement, with retrospective effect 3. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (India Code) — Section 124: grievous hurt by throwing or administering acid; 10 years to life 4. Laxmi v. Union of India (Supreme Court, 18.07.2013) — judgment text, Centre for Law and Policy Research — acid sale regulation directions and minimum ₹3 lakh compensation