The Supreme Court on Friday directed the issuance of a non-bailable warrant through the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate against an accused in an acid attack case who had earlier been granted bail by the Allahabad High Court. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale ordered the issuance of the non-bailable warrant after the survivor's counsel informed the court that the accused had refused to accept the apex court's notice.
According to the office report of the Assistant Registrar, Supreme Court, the notice issued to the accused was returned unserved with a postal remark stating "refused to accept, return to sender." The petitioner's counsel brought this to the bench's attention, leading to the issuance of the warrant. The case dates back to November 5, 2016, when Aslam, then 27 years old, was savagely attacked by three unknown assailants in Hapur District, Uttar Pradesh, during an attempted robbery of his e-rickshaw.
When he resisted, they cut him with a knife, threw acid on his face, and took away the e-rickshaw. The incident left him 100 per cent visually impaired, according to the appeal filed in the apex court against the High Court's order granting bail to the accused. Since then, Aslam has faced immense hardship, struggling to support his aging parents, wife, and three children. Despite the gravity of the crime, no compensation has been provided to Aslam to date by any authorities, forcing him to rely on external agencies and NGOs for support.
The bail granted by the Allahabad High Court to one of the accused was challenged by Aslam in the Supreme Court with the assistance of Brave Souls Foundation, an NGO founded by Shaheen Malik, herself an acid attack survivor. The foundation, dedicated to the welfare and rehabilitation of acid attack survivors, has been providing Aslam with legal and medical assistance. Additionally, the organisation supports his family by providing monthly rations and educational aid for his children. The High Court granted bail to the accused on October 16, 2023, on the grounds that his case was clearly distinguishable from that of the other accused persons.