Acid attack more heinous than homicide, tool of patriarchal violence: SC

ISLAMABAD: In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that “vitriolage” (acid attack) is an offence more heinous than homicide.

The ruling came after Abdul Manan, convicted for throwing acid on a young woman in Faisalabad, appealed against a 2022 Lahore High Court (LHC) order.

The LHC had upheld an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) verdict sentencing him to life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs1 million.

Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar, heading a three-judge bench consisting of Justice Salahuddin Panhwar and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim, upheld the LHC order.

The ruling comes only days after an acid attack on a female doctor in Quetta’s Civil Hospital. Following the attack on 29-year-old Mahnoor Nasir, doctors in Quetta went on strike, demanding a thorough investigation.

“Unlike death, which consumes its victim only once, the victim of an acid assault is relegated to a living death, where they are compelled to endure the agony of their trauma and the degradation of their physical self on a daily basis,” observed Justice Kakar in a 14-page strongly worded judgment he authored.

In the court ruling, federal and provincial governments were also recommended to consider accommodating acid attack victims under disability quotas along with enactment and enforcement of specialised legislation for establishment of a National Acid Survivors’ Rehabilitation Fund.

The ruling added that such a statutory fund should provide comprehensive medical coverage for extensive reconstructive surgeries and specialised physical therapy.

The fund should also provide mandatory access to professional trauma counselling, psychotherapy and psychiatric care for psychological and social rehabilitation.

“The perpetrator’s objective is not merely to kill, but to extinguish the victim’s soul, leaving the living corpse as a permanent reminder of their depravity,” Justice Kakar said.

The apex court also recommended a mandatory monthly stipend for survivors who, due to the nature of their injuries or ongoing medical conditions, are rendered incapable of financial self-support.

Justice Kakar also suggested the formulation of national rehabilitation guidelines as a standardised framework ensuring gratuitous, lifelong medical and mental health treatment across all state-mandated and private medical facilities through the fund.

He further observed that acid violence is a tool of patriarchal dominance. “In the past, such incidents have occurred following rejection of marriage proposals or sexual advances, as well as dowry disputes.”

The ruling added that acid violence is used to inflict a social death upon women by destroying their physical identity.

The primary deterrent against such depravity lies in a dual strategy of rigorous criminalisation followed by stringent regulation of corrosive substances, Justice Kakar observed, citing a number of examples from foreign jurisdictions such as Bangladesh and Cambodia.

The first essential step towards eradication is the categorical criminalisation of the act itself, he added.

The judgment also highlighted that the eradication of acid violence was inextricably linked to restrictions on access to corrosive substances.

While the legislative amendments of 2011 served to criminalise acid violence with the severity it warrants, the persistence of such atrocities reveals that penal sanctions alone are insufficient to address the root of the problem, Justice Kakar observed.

“As long as corrosive substances remain easily available, the deterrent effect of penal consequences will be perpetually undermined.”

In this context, the Punjab Acid Control Act 2025 represents a watershed moment in provincial jurisprudence. Justice Kakar cited it as an example of a shift from post-occurrence punishment to pre-emptive regulation, noting that the Act mandates a rigorous licensing regime and categorically prohibits the sale of acid to individuals under the age of 18.

“It is our sanguine expectation that the rigorous enforcement of such specialised regulatory regimes will effectively dismantle the accessibility of these lethal instruments, thereby serving as a robust bulwark to curb and eventually eradicate this heinous offence from our social fabric,” Justice Kakar emphasised.

He added that the ordeal of an acid attack survivor does not end with the conclusion of the criminal trial. Instead, it marks the beginning of a gruelling, lifelong journey of medical intervention.

Survivors are frequently subjected to an exhaustive series of reconstructive surgeries and specialised procedures that are not only physically agonising but also financially prohibitive, rendering essential healthcare inaccessible to the majority of victims, the judgment noted.

Citing the Asian Human Rights Commission, the judgment said the devastating impact of acid violence in Pakistan was exemplified by survivors such as Irum Saeed and Memuna Khan, who underwent 25 and 21 reconstructive surgeries respectively following attacks triggered by marital rejection and inter-family disputes.

Justice Kakar added that despite existing laws, their purpose was defeated if implementation and enforcement remained weak, as evidenced by recurring incidents across the country.

The SC also strongly recommended that the high courts actively monitor and ensure that, in cases of vitriolage, statutory timelines provided under relevant laws for the completion of trials are strictly adhered to.

The prime intent of the legislature is to ensure swift adjudication and prevent secondary victimisation, the judgment added.

Vitriolage is an offence deeply rooted in gender-based violence, deep-seated misogyny and patriarchal aggression, the judgment said.

The Supreme Court also recommended that the federal and all provincial governments impose a complete ban on the sale of acid to private individuals.

For legal acid sales, the court suggested a centralised digital system governed and monitored by the relevant authorities in real time.

Under this system, entities intending to purchase acid must apply through prescribed electronic forms, disclosing the purpose of purchase and the name and details of the purchaser, along with a photograph and biometric thumb impression.

Such a real-time system will completely eradicate manual record-keeping and enable the trade to be managed with absolute transparency, the ruling added.

The apex court judgment was forwarded to all High Courts and relevant departments of the federal and provincial governments.

Case history

On September 4, 2019, the accused threw sulfuric acid on the victim’s face while she was cooking in the kitchen of her home. The victim sustained extensive burns on her face, chest, back, left leg and foot, as well as “complete destruction of the left ear”, court documents state.

The victim was examined on January 16, 2020, during trial proceedings. At the time, “she was unable to recline, move or walk”, according to court documents.

The victim has been bedridden since the incident.

Abdul Manan denied the allegations but failed to provide evidence in his defence. At the time of the incident, he was a minor, with court documents stating his age as 17–18.

The petitioner’s lawyer requested leniency owing to his young age, while the prosecutor argued that “age cannot be a shield for such barbaric acts”.

On February 1, 2020, the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) Faisalabad sentenced the accused to life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs1 million to be paid to the victim.

Following an appeal, the Lahore High Court (LHC) upheld the ATC’s ruling on November 21, 2022.