It stands to reason and also is entirely in order that in a most pragmatic step, the Kerala High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled XXXXXX v State of Kerala in Crl. Appeal No.548 of 2022 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2025:KER:68773 against the judgment dated 22.09.2021 in SC No.408 of 2019 of Additional District & Sessions Court (for the trial of cases relating to atrocities and sexual violence against women & children), Ernakulam that was finally heard on 21.08.2025 and then was pronounced as recently as on 25-9-2025 has upheld the conviction and life sentence of a man who was found guilty of attacking his wife and four children by pouring acid on them.
It must be noted that a Division Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Hon’ble Mr Justice KV Jayakumar of the Kerala High Court has also directed the State government to pay Rs 3 lakhs each to the convict’s wife and four minor children who were injured in the ghastly attack on finding that the Trial Court had failed to consider the aspect of victim compensation. It was also underscored by the Bench that in acid attack cases, the courts must ensure that victims get proper financial relief.
What also must be borne in mind is that the Kerala High Court has passed this leading judgment in a criminal appeal that had been filed by the accused man who had challenged the Trial Court’s verdict against him. We thus see that the Kerala High Court refused to interfere with the accused man’s conviction and upheld his conviction and life sentence for committing the offence under Section 326A IPC. It also mandated that the man’s actions were premeditated and caused serious injuries to his wife and children, justifying the severity of the punishment thus displaying zero tolerance for such ghastly crimes which is the crying need of the hour also. But it has deemed it fit to set aside his conviction and so also sentence for the offence of house trespass, finding clearly that he was in lawful possession of the house where the crime had taken place. Very rightly so!
At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr Justice KV Jayakumar for a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and himself sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
This case arises from a night of unspeakable violence. Under the cover of darkness, the accused is alleged to have turned upon his own family and carried out a brutal acid attack on his wife and four innocent children.”
As we see, the Division Bench then lays bare in para 2 that:
The accused was charged as the perpetrator of this heinous crime and stood trial before the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ernakulam, designated for cases involving atrocities and sexual violence against women and children, in S.C. No. 408/2019. He faced prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 450, 326A, and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.”
While shedding more light on the punishment that he was meted out, the Division Bench reveals in para 3 stating that:
The learned Sessions Judge found the accused guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 326A and 450 of IPC. The accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- for the offence under Section 326A IPC with a default sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The accused was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- for the offence under Section 450 IPC with a default sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. But he was found not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and thereby acquitted.”
To put things in perspective, the Division Bench while elaborating on the prosecution case envisages in para 4 disclosing that:
On 17.01.2019 at 3:00 a.m., while the defacto complainant and her four minor children were sleeping on a cot in the bedroom of their rented residence bearing Door No. 1/176, situated within the limits of Pambakuda Grama Panchayat at Neythusalapady in Memury Village, the accused, who is the husband of the defacto complainant, allegedly committed a heinous act. It is alleged that, harbouring enmity towards the defacto complainant on suspicion that she was having illicit relationships with others, the accused, with the intention of causing grievous bodily harm and possibly death, poured acid into the bedroom through the window. As a result of the acid attack, his elder daughter sustained grievous injuries, including severe burns to her face and eyes, which resulted in permanent loss of her eyesight. His wife and three other minor children also suffered burn injuries on their faces and other parts of their body in the attack.”
While elaborating on the proceedings before the Trial Court, the Division Bench specifies in para 5 stating that:
The final report in the present case was originally filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kolencherry. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and registered the case as C.P. No.12/2019. After the completion of the preliminary steps, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Ernakulam, under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Subsequently, the Sessions Court, Ernakulam made over the case to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam, for trial and disposal. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after hearing both sides, framed a charge against the accused. The charge was read over and explained to the accused in vernacular, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.”
Do note, the Division Bench notes in para 6 that:
During the course of trial, PWs.1 to 19 were examined by the prosecution and Exts.P1 to P22 series were marked. Material objects 1 to 5 were identified and marked. After the close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. He maintained the plea of innocence. DWs.1 and 2 were examined as defence witnesses. After a full-fledged trial, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 326A and 450 of the Indian Penal Code, as aforesaid.”
Do also note, the Division Bench then notes in para 40 that:
PW1 is the wife of the appellant. PW1 deposed that she had three children in wedlock with Sasi, her former husband. After the death of her husband (Sasi), she started living with the appellant and a girl child (CW5) was born in their relationship. She narrated the physical and mental torture to which she and her children were subjected by the appellant after consuming liquor. When his torture was unbearable, she lodged a complaint before the Ramamangalam Police Station. Pursuant to the complaint, a crime was registered and the accused was in judicial custody for about 35 days.”
While shedding more light, the Division Bench then further lays bare revealing in para 41 that:
In her evidence, PW1 spoke about two incidents. The first incident was on 16.01.2019 at about 5.00 - 5.30 p.m., the household articles, bed, clothes etc., were burned by someone. She and her children removed the half-burned articles from their house and went to sleep at about 10.00 – 11.00 p.m. At around 3.00 a.m. on 17.01.2019, someone poured acid through the window and she and her children sustained injuries. At first, they were taken to the Taluk Hospital, Piravom by PW5 (Saju George) and thereafter, they were taken to Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. The Police came to the Medical College Hospital and recorded Ext.P1 FIS. She identified MO-2 steel cup, which was used for pouring the acid through the window. PWs. 2 to 4 also had a similar version about the incident, but none of them spoke about who the perpetrator of the crime was.”
Be it noted, the Division Bench notes in para 64 that:
Sections 326A and 326B of the IPC were enacted in the year 2013, as the number of acid attack cases reported throughout the country was increasing. Both Sections 326A and 326B IPC provide severe punishment for offenders involved in acid attack cases. In the instant case, there are five victims, who are none other than the wife and children of the appellant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are unable to accept the contentions of the appellant that the sentence of life imprisonment ordered by the trial court is harsh or excessive.”
Notably, the Division Bench then notes in para 65 that:
It is pertinent to note that the trial court has not ordered any compensation payable to the victims under Section 357A of Cr.P.C. Instead, the learned Sessions Judge has ordered to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) under Section 326A of IPC. It is further directed that if the fine amount is realised, it shall be paid to the victims of the case.”
While citing relevant case law, the Division Bench mentions in para 69 that:
In Laxmi v. Union of India and others (2014) 4 SCC 427, the Apex Court had issued some guidelines as to the quantum of compensation payable to the victims. In that case, it was directed that the acid attack victims shall be paid compensation of at least Rs.3 lakhs by the State Government/Union Territory concerned as the aftercare and rehabilitation cost.”
Adding more to it, the Division Bench then further observes in para 70 that:
In Parivartan Kendra v. Union of India and others 2015 KHC 4784, the Hon’ble Supreme Court made it clear that the directives issued in Laxmi (supra) will not be a bar for the State Governments to award more compensation to the victim. It was also noted that the Court has not put any condition in Laxmi (supra) as to the degree of injuries which a victim has suffered due to an acid attack.”
It is worth noting that the Division Bench notes in para 71 that:
On going through Section 357A of Cr.P.C. and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the above-referred cases, we are of the considered opinion that it is the mandatory duty of the court, at the conclusion of a criminal case, to apply its mind and ensure that just and proper compensation is awarded to the victim of the case. The award or refusal of compensation in a particular case may be well within the discretion of the court concerned. But, every criminal court has to apply its mind as to the award of compensation to the victims at the conclusion of a trial. The said duty to apply its mind and to award just, fair and reasonable compensation to the victim assumes more significance in a case of acid attack under Sections 326A and 326B of the Penal Code (or under Sections 124(1) and 124(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita). However, the trial court has not properly applied its mind and ordered a meagre amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, as fine. No recommendation was also made under Section 357A(3) of the Code.”
Finally and far most significantly, the Division Bench then concludes and so also encapsulates in para 72 what constitutes the actual cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating very precisely and directing and holding that:
In view of the dictum laid down by the Apex Court, we are of the considered opinion that the learned Sessions Judge was not justified in not awarding compensation to the victims. The learned Sessions Judge has overlooked this vital aspect. In cases of acid attack, it is the bounden duty of the Courts to ensure that the victim is adequately compensated. In such cases, it is the imperative duty of the trial court to apply its mind and to pass appropriate orders to compensate the victim. The word “may” used in Sub Section (3) of Section 357A Cr.P.C. should be interpreted as mandatory. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to direct the State Government to pay a compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs only) each to PWs. 1 to 4 and CW5, the victims of this case.
In the result,
- The Criminal Appeal is allowed in part.
- The conviction and the sentence imposed under Section 450 of the IPC are hereby set aside.
- The conviction and the sentence imposed under Section 326A of IPC are hereby confirmed.
- The State Government is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,00/- (Rupees Three lakhs only) each to PWs. 1 to 4 and CW5, the victims, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh.
