NextFin News - In a landmark judicial intervention on Tuesday, January 27, 2026, the Supreme Court of India challenged the existing framework of victim compensation, proposing that the immovable properties of acid attack convicts be attached and auctioned to provide financial restitution to survivors. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant expressed profound dissatisfaction with the current pace of trials and the inadequacy of state-sponsored compensation schemes, which often fail to cover the lifelong medical and rehabilitative costs incurred by victims.
The court's inquiry arose during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the enforcement of previous safety and compensation guidelines. According to ETLegalWorld, the bench noted a staggering backlog of cases across the country. Data submitted by 15 High Courts revealed that Uttar Pradesh leads with 198 pending cases, followed by Gujarat with 114, Bihar with 68, and West Bengal with 60. The CJI Kant-led bench emphasized that unless punitive actions are sufficiently "painful," the legal system fails to provide a credible deterrent against such heinous crimes.
This shift toward a "convict-pays" model represents a significant departure from the traditional reliance on the Victim Compensation Scheme (VCS) under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Historically, compensation has been a state responsibility, often capped at amounts that barely cover initial surgeries. By targeting the personal wealth of the perpetrator, the Supreme Court is advocating for a restorative justice framework that aligns the financial burden of the crime directly with the individual responsible for it. This approach mirrors the "polluter pays" principle in environmental law, adapted here for criminal restitution.
The economic rationale behind this proposal is rooted in the high cost of long-term care. Acid attack survivors frequently require dozens of reconstructive surgeries, specialized dermatological care, and psychological counseling, with costs often running into millions of rupees. Current state grants, which typically range from 300,000 to 700,000 INR, are often exhausted within the first year of treatment. By liquidating the assets of the accused, the judiciary aims to create a more robust and sustainable funding pool for the victim’s lifelong needs, including education and employment rehabilitation.
Furthermore, the court has demanded comprehensive data from all States and Union Territories within four weeks. This data must include not only the legal status of cases but also the socio-economic profiles of survivors—detailing their academic qualifications, current employment, and total medical expenditures. This granular approach suggests that the court is looking to move beyond flat-rate compensation toward a bespoke restitution model based on the actual economic loss and future needs of each survivor.
From a legal and policy perspective, the Supreme Court’s suggestion for legislative intervention signals a potential overhaul of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). If the Union government adopts these recommendations, it could lead to the institutionalization of property attachment as a standard punitive measure for gender-based violence. This would likely involve the creation of specialized asset-tracing units within law enforcement to prevent convicts from transferring property to relatives during the trial process.
Looking ahead, the implementation of such a policy will face significant procedural hurdles, including the protection of the rights of the convict's dependents who may reside in the targeted properties. However, the judicial intent is clear: the deterrent theory of punishment must evolve to include financial consequences that are as life-altering as the crimes themselves. As the Supreme Court continues to monitor these trials on an "out-of-turn" basis, the legal landscape for acid attack survivors in India appears to be moving toward a more aggressive, asset-backed form of justice that prioritizes the survivor's economic survival over the convict's property rights.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.