Syed Wajid Ul Zafar
These are the cruel and thoughtless questions acid attack survivors are forced to hear in the aftermath of unimaginable violence. Instead of receiving unconditional compassion, they are met with interrogation. Instead of society uniting to condemn the attacker, the survivor herself becomes the subject of suspicion. The phrasing of the question—“why”—presumes there must be a reason, a justification, a flaw in the survivor’s character that provoked such a brutal act. But the truth is plain and undeniable: no matter the person, no matter their background, no matter their so-called “character,” nothing can ever justify an acid attack. The act of asking this question perpetuates a cycle of judgment, shame, and silence. It is not curiosity—it is cruelty. It constitutes a second assault, one delivered not with acid but with words.Globally, acid attacks have been recognized as one of the most severe forms of gender-based violence. According to data compiled by the Acid Survivors Trust International (ASTI), over 1,500 acid attacks are reported annually worldwide, with the majority of victims being women and girls. Many more cases remain unreported due to stigma. In India, despite Supreme Court orders restricting acid sales and despite the insertion of strict penal provisions in law, incidents persist.
This article argues that the blame must always remain on the attacker—not on the attacked. It explores the barbarity of acid violence, the legal framework under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the toxic culture of victim-blaming, the dangerous myth of “bad character,” and the psychological toll of judgment. It also holds up a mirror to society: asking what we would do if our own loved ones were attacked. Finally, it calls for a change in narrative, demanding empathy, accountability, and justice.
The Barbarity Of Acid Attacks: Acid is not a weapon chosen at random. It is selected deliberately for its capacity to cause irreversible disfigurement and lifelong suffering. When hurled at a person, acid melts skin, muscles, and even bone. Victims often lose their eyesight, endure multiple reconstructive surgeries, and suffer permanent scarring. The medical consequences are catastrophic; the psychological consequences are indescribable. What makes acid violence distinct is its intent: the purpose is not to kill, but to maim, to erase identity, and to leave the survivor carrying a visible mark of violence forever. It is a punishment designed to extend beyond the moment of the attack, a weapon of lifelong humiliation. International law recognizes acid violence as a form of gender-based violence. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women has categorized acid attacks as a direct violation of women’s human rights to life, dignity, and security. Yet in many societies, including ours, survivors face not only physical pain but also social stigma. Instead of unquestioned support, they are interrogated about their choices, their morality, and their conduct. Thus, acid attacks become a double crime: the first committed by the perpetrator who throws the acid, the second by society that throws accusations.
Legal Backbone| Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 124 : Law in India has evolved to address acid violence. Under the old Indian Penal Code, Sections 326A and 326B were inserted in 2013 to specifically deal with acid attacks. These provisions have now been carried forward and strengthened under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.Section 124 of the BNS criminalizes acid attacks as follows:
Section 124(1): Whoever causes permanent or partial damage, deformity, burns, maiming, or disfigurement of any part of a person’s body by throwing acid or similar corrosive substances shall be punished with imprisonment not less than ten years, which may extend to life imprisonment, along with a fine. The fine must be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses of the victim and shall be paid directly to the victim.
Section 124(2): Whoever attempts to throw or administer acid with the intention of causing harm shall be punished with imprisonment of five to seven years and a fine.This explicit recognition of the survivor’s right to medical compensation and the minimum punishment of 10 years reflects the seriousness of the crime. The law makes no allowance for “provocation” or “character” as a defense. The question “why were you attacked” has no legal standing—it is merely a cultural toxin, not a judicial principle. The Supreme Court in Laxmi v. Union of India (2014) further strengthened this framework by directing regulation of acid sales, mandating rehabilitation schemes, and recognizing acid attack survivors as victims of human rights violations. Importantly, the Court never entertained justifications linked to the survivor’s conduct.Thus, legally and constitutionally, acid attacks are crimes without excuse.
The Culture Of Blame: Despite clear law, society persists in asking survivors: “Why did this happen to you?” This culture of blame is deeply rooted in patriarchal notions of morality. Similar narratives can be found in:
Rape cases, where survivors are questioned about their clothes, habits, or sexual history.
Dowry Deaths, where women are accused of being greedy or disobedient.
Honor killings, where girls are killed for marrying outside their community and blamed for dishonoring their family.
In Each Instance, blame shifts from the perpetrator to the victim. The acid attack survivor becomes not a symbol of resilience but an object of suspicion. This is not ignorance; it is complicity. By asking “why,” society excuses the act and implicitly validates it.
“Acid attacks are an inexcusable crime against humanity, strictly condemned by law (BNS Section 124) and morality, regardless of the victim’s past. Asking “why” or blaming survivors only excuses perpetrators and fuels the crime. End the culture of accusation; survivors deserve unconditional solidarity and justice.”
The False Logic Of “Bad Character”: Some argue—openly or implicitly—that if a woman is of “bad character,” she “deserves” what she got. This dangerous logic has been used for centuries to justify violence against women. But who defines “bad character”? In a patriarchal society, any woman who asserts her autonomy can be branded immoral. A girl who says no to a marriage proposal, a wife who seeks divorce, or a woman who chooses her partner may all be called “bad.”Even if a woman had genuine flaws, does that permit someone to throw acid on her? The answer is an emphatic no. The law does not condone private revenge. Morality does not justify cruelty. Humanity does not excuse barbarity. The notion of “bad character” is nothing more than a patriarchal weapon—used to silence women, excuse perpetrators, and shift blame away from those truly guilty.
A Mirror To Society|What If It Were Your Daughter or Sister? To those who ask survivors, “why were you attacked?”—let me hold a mirror to you.
God forbid, imagine your daughter walking home from college. She is approached by a man who insists she must accept his advances. She refuses, with courage. Humiliated, his fragile ego shatters. In rage, he buys a bottle of acid and pours it over her. Her face burns, her dreams dissolve, and her life changes in a moment.Now imagine your sister leaving work late. She is stalked by a roadside Romeo who cannot take no for an answer. She rejects him. The next day, he attacks her with acid. She loses her eyesight permanently.Imagine your wife waiting for a bus. A man, angry that she refused his “friendship,” throws acid at her. Her body is scarred for life.In these moments, would you dare to look into their eyes and ask: “Why were you attacked? What did you do wrong?” Would you blame your daughter for rejecting a man? Would you shame your sister for daring to walk home? Would you question your wife’s morality instead of the attacker’s cruelty? If your answer is no—and it must be no—then why do you ask other survivors such questions? Every acid attack survivor is someone’s daughter, someone’s sister, someone’s wife, someone’s mother. To judge them is to betray your own humanity.
Acid Attacks, Rape Culture|The Same Roots: The mindset that blames acid attack survivors is identical to the mindset that sustains rape culture. Feminist scholars have long argued that patriarchal societies sustain themselves by shifting the burden of purity, morality, and honor onto women while excusing men’s violence as natural or provoked. Asking rape survivors “why were you there?” or “what were you wearing?” is structurally the same as asking acid survivors “why were you attacked?” Both suggest that women’s actions cause violence, while men are absolved of responsibility. Internationally, this mindset has been challenged. In many countries, laws now prohibit bringing up the sexual history of rape survivors in trials. Similar steps are needed to outlaw or socially criminalize questioning the character of acid attack survivors.
The Psychological Toll Of Judgment: The physical injuries of an acid attack are devastating, but the psychological scars of judgment often run deeper. Survivors who are asked “why” feel doubly victimized: first by the attacker, then by society.Psychological studies have shown that secondary victimization—when survivors are blamed or doubted—leads to heightened levels of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and suicidal tendencies. Survivors may feel isolated, ashamed, and worthless. What society fails to understand is that recovery is not only about surgeries—it is about dignity. When a survivor is questioned about her morality, she is stripped of dignity yet again. This emotional violence cannot be measured in scars but is no less brutal.
Changing The Narrative: How do we break this cycle of accusation? The answer lies in changing our narrative.
Media Responsibility: Journalists must avoid sensationalizing survivors’ pasts and focus instead on the crime and the criminal.
Public Discourse: Replace “why were you attacked” with “how can we help you heal?” and “what punishment is the attacker facing?”
Legal Reforms: Ensure strict enforcement of BNS Section 124 and speedy trials for acid attack cases. Education: Schools and universities must teach empathy, respect, and gender equality to dismantle patriarchal notions of blame.
Community Action: Civil society must normalize support for survivors, creating platforms for their rehabilitation and reintegration. When the narrative changes, survivors will no longer be interrogated—they will be honored for their resilience and supported in their recovery.
Conclusion: Acid burns flesh, but accusations burn dignity. Asking survivors “why” is a second form of violence, as cruel and lasting as the first. The truth is unshakable: no woman, no man, no human being deserves an acid attack, regardless of their past or character. The law—through BNS Section 124—makes this clear. Morality makes it clearer. Humanity makes it clearest.Every time we ask “why,” we excuse perpetrators. Every time we blame survivors, we embolden criminals. To end acid attacks, we must first end the culture of accusation. Survivors deserve solidarity, not suspicion; justice, not judgment.
(The author is Ph.D Scholar at School of Law, University of Kashmir.
The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the author and aren’t necessarily in accord with the views of “Kashmir Horizon”)
[email protected]
