Urmila Subba vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors

Page No.# 1/9
GAHC010004032025

2026:GAU-AS:7560
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/149/2025
URMILA SUBBA
D/O- SRI KARAN KUMAR SUBBA, R/O- KHARUPETIA, TILAPOOTY, P.S.
KHARUPETIA, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN- 784115.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
ASSAM SACHIVALAYA, DISPUR, ASSAM-781006.
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
A BLOCK
4TH FLOOR
ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL)
DISPUR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-781006.
3:THE DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
HEALTH COMPLEX
LICHUBAGAN
HENGRABARI
GUWAHATI-781006.
4:THE SUPERINTENDENT
GAUHATI MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL
NARAKASUR HILLTOP
BHANGAGARH

Page No.# 2/9
GUWAHATI
ASSAM-781032.
5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
DARRANG
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DARRANG
NH-15
MANGALDOI
DARRANG
DIST. DARRANG
ASSAM-784125.
6:THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
NDCC.II BUILDING
JAI SINGH ROAD
NEW DELHI-11000
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. D GHOSH, MS N DEKA,MS H BETALA,MR I
CHAKMA,MR. S. K. CHAKMA,MR A.K. HAJONG
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. D.J. DAS, SC, C.G.C.,SC, HEALTH

:::BEFORE:::
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
Date on which judgment is reserved : N/A

Date of pronouncement of judgment : 01.06.2026

Whether the pronouncement is of the
Operative part of the judgment : N/A

Whether the full judgment has been
Pronounced : Yes

Page No.# 3/9

Judgment & Order (Oral)
Heard Ms. D. Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. P.
Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Health & Family Welfare Department for the
respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4 as well as Ms. M. Barman, learned State Counsel for
the respondent Nos. 1 & 5.
2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner, a victim of an acid attack, has
sought for expeditious specialised/advanced medical treatment for healing and
correction of the permanent disfigurement and scars resulting from the said
attack, at a hospital having appropriate facilities and requisite arrangements.
The petitioner has also sought for directions to the respondent authorities for
bearing the expenses of such treatment, including travel and lodging expenses,
as well as release of the additional compensation claimed by her.
3. The petitioner was married in the month of August, 2018. On 31.08.2022,
she was subjected to an acid attack allegedly committed by her husband, as a
result of which she sustained grievous burn injuries on her face, neck and other
parts of her body. She was initially taken to Mongaldoi Civil Hospital and
considering the severity of her injuries, was thereafter referred to and admitted
at the Gauhati Medical College and Hospital (GMC&H), Guwahati, where she
underwent emergency treatment and multiple surgeries. The petitioner has
suffered permanent disfigurement of her face due to the said attack. In
connection with the incident, Kharupetia Police Station Case No. 238/2022 was
registered under Section 326(A) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the
alleged perpetrator, who incidentally is her husband.

4. The petitioner applied for compensation under the Assam Victim
Compensation Scheme, 2012. The District Legal Services Authority, Darrang,

Page No.# 4/9
Mangaldoi, by order dated 14.08.2023, granted financial assistance of Rs.
3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only), which amount was released to the
petitioner on 30.09.2023. The petitioner has thereafter undergone treatment at
various medical facilities, including GMC&H, Guwahati.
5. It is the contention of the petitioner that the compensation amount
received by her has almost been exhausted towards medical expenses, medicine
costs, travelling expenses and other allied expenses incurred in connection with
her treatment. It is contended that she is yet to undergo multiple surgeries and
advanced treatment for correction of the burn injuries sustained in the acid
attack and owing to her financial constraints, she is unable to bear the expenses
required for such treatment and is, therefore, in need of further financial
assistance.
6. Ms. D. Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner,
being a victim of an acid attack, is entitled to higher compensation in view of
the trauma, suffering, permanent disfigurement and hardship endured by her, as
well as the financial constraints faced by her family in bearing the cost of
treatment. She submits that the petitioner is also entitled to an additional
compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) in terms of the
communication dated 09.11.2016 issued by the Government of India regarding
assistance to victims of acid attack.
7. Ms. D. Ghosh, learned counsel, by referring to the order of the Division
Bench of this Court passed in XXX vs. IN RE :- the State of Assam & Anr.
[WP(C)749/2014] , dated 24.06.2016, as well as the settled position of law
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Laxmi vs. Union of India & Ors. ,
reported in (2014) 4 SCC 427 , submits that the responsibility for treatment

Page No.# 5/9
and rehabilitation of a victim of acid attack lies upon the State and that the
State is required to bear all expenses in connection therewith. She accordingly
submits that the respondent authorities may be directed to ensure immediate
specialised medical treatment to the petitioner by bearing all expenses relating
to such treatment, including the cost of medicines, travelling and lodging
expenses. Learned counsel further submits that, if the treatment required by the
petitioner is not available within the State of Assam, she may be referred to a
well-equipped hospital where surgeries for burn injuries caused by the acid
attack are available and such treatment be provided to her free of cost.
8. This Court, considering the claims of the petitioner, by order dated
24.03.2025, directed the respondent authorities to constitute a Medical Board to
ascertain whether the petitioner required advanced treatment for healing and
removal of scars resulting from the acid attack and whether such treatment was
available at GMC&H, Guwahati. The Medical Board was also directed to indicate
the probable expenditure involved in such treatment at GMC&H as well as at
any private medical institution.
9. Pursuant thereto, a Medical Board was constituted consisting of specialists
from the Departments of Plastic Surgery, Dermatology and Surgery of GMC&H.
The Medical Board examined the petitioner on 03.04.2025 and thereafter
submitted its report before this Court. The report of the Medical Board is
reproduced hereinunder:
“… Report of the Medical Board
In accordance with the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court's Order dated 24.03.2025 in
W.P. (C) No. 149/2025, the respondent No. 4 ie, the Superintendent of Gauhati Medical
College Hospital, Guwahati, duly constituted a Medical Board so as to verify whether the
petitioner requires advance treatment for healing and removal of scar out of the acid
attack, and whether such treatment is available at GMCH, Guwahati, along with

Page No.# 6/9
suggestions regarding the cost of such treatment at GMCH and in a private hospital. The
said Medical Board was constituted by Order No. MCH/899/2025/MEDICAL
EXAM/URMILA SUBBA/37-A Dated 29.03.2025 comprising of the following specialists
doctors of GMCH, Guwahati:
1. Dr. Kabita Kalita, Prof. & HOD of Plastic Surgery Dept., GMCH as Chairman
2. Dr. Bobita Boro, Associate Prof. of Dermatology Dept., GMCH as Member
Secretary
3. Dr. Partha Pratim Bora, Assistant Prof. of Surgery Dept., GMCH as Member
4. Dr. Ujjal Kumar Sarmah, Dy. Superintendent, GMCH as Member
On April 3, 2025, at 11:00 a.m., the Board met in the GMCH's Conference Hall with
the petitioner URMILA SUBBA present to examine the petitioner's current health
condition to assess the requirement of advance treatment for the petitioner to improve
and its finding are as noted below:
1. After the acid attack, the petitioner was initially taken to GMCH's & admitted
in the Burn Unit on August 31, 2022, with 10-12% acid burns on her face, neck,
and shoulders. On October 7th 2022, the required surgery (debridement + SSG
over face under GA) was performed. On November 8, 2022, the patient was
released on request, with instructions to visit the burn clinic on Thursday, two
weeks later, after that the Petitioner had visited the Plastic Surgery OPD. On
02.12.2022, Eye OPD on 8-12-2022( Thursday). On 22-4-2024 she attended
plastic surgery OPD and advised her to attend plastic surgery OPD in June of last
week for planning of OT date.
2. The petitioner was admitted at GMCH on July 1, 2024 under the Plastic
Surgery Dept., with Post acid burn left lower eyelid ectropion. Surgery was done
for release of Ectropion and SSG. The petitioner was discharged on July 4, 2024
with the advice to attend Plastic Surgery OPD on Monday after one (1) week/SOS.
3. She was visited plastic surgery OPD on 15-7-2024 for check up.
4. For improvement of the face appearance and function of eyes patient will
require multiple surgeries in multiple stages, which can be performed at GMCH.
But the time required, and outcome for these surgeries cannot be predicted. Even
the expenditure required cannot be predicted arbitrarily at this moment as it will
require multiple stages of surgery.
[Dr. Ujjal Kr. Sarmah]
Dy. Superintendent, GMCH
Member of the Medical Board
[Dr. Partha Pratim Bora]

Page No.# 7/9
Asstt. Prof. of Surgery Dept., GMCH
Member of the Medical Board

[Dr. Bobita Boro]
Associate Prof. of Dermatology Dept. GMCH
Member Secy. of the Medical Board
[Dr. Kabita Kalita]
Prof. & HOD of Plastic Surgery Dept., GMCH
Chairman of the Medical Board.”
10. Mr. D. P. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Health & Family Welfare
Department, submits that the Medical Board has categorically opined that the
petitioner would require multiple surgeries in multiple stages for improvement of
her facial appearance and function of the eyes and that such surgeries can be
performed at GMC&H. He further submits that the time required, outcome and
exact expenditure for such treatment cannot be assessed at this stage as the
treatment process would involve multiple surgical interventions.
11. I have heard the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing
for the parties and also carefully perused the materials available on record.
12. The petitioner is an unfortunate victim of an acid attack. The perpetrator,
incidentally, is her own husband. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had
undergone various treatments for the injuries sustained as a result of the acid
attack at various hospitals, including GMC&H, Guwahati.
13. The report of the Medical Board, as constituted in terms of the order of this
Court dated 24.03.2025 passed in the present proceedings, clearly indicates the
requirement of further advanced treatment for improvement of the facial
appearance and function of the eyes, which would require multiple surgeries in

Page No.# 8/9
multiple stages and which can be performed at GMC&H, Guwahati.
14. It is a settled position of law that the responsibility for treatment and
rehabilitation of a victim of acid attack lies upon the State and the State is under
an obligation to ensure that such victim receives immediate and effective
specialised medical treatment.
15. In the case of XXX vs. IN RE :- the State of Assam (supra) , while
dealing with the issue of treatment and rehabilitation of victims of acid attack,
observed that the responsibility for such treatment lies upon the State. The
Division Bench directed the State Government to ensure that immediate
specialised medical treatment is provided to the victims of acid attack in the
hospitals recommended by the Medical Board in its report. It was further
observed that, instead of disbursing money directly to the victims, the State
Government may pay the expenses of treatment directly to the concerned
hospital and shall also provide travelling and lodging expenses to the victims
and one attendant accompanying them.
16. In the case of Laxmi (supra) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that
full responsibility is cast upon the State for bearing all expenses for treatment
and rehabilitation of the victim of an acid attack. In the present case, as noted
above, the Medical Board has suggested that for improvement of the facial
appearance and function of the eyes, the petitioner would require multiple
surgeries in multiple stages, which can be performed at Gauhati Medical College
& Hospital, Guwahati. I am, therefore, of the considered view that the petitioner
is entitled to be provided advanced medical treatment free of cost at Gauhati
Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati.

Page No.# 9/9

17. Having regard to the settled legal position of law, the findings recorded by
the Medical Board and the undisputed fact that the petitioner is a victim of an
acid attack who continues to require specialised treatment, this Court is of the
considered view that the petitioner is entitled to receive further advanced
medical treatment free of cost.
18. Accordingly, the respondent authorities, more particularly the Health &
Family Welfare Department, Government of Assam, are directed to ensure that
the petitioner is provided with all necessary specialised/advanced medical
treatment, including multiple surgeries and allied procedures, at Gauhati Medical
College & Hospital, Guwahati, as advised by the treating doctors and the
Medical Board. The entire expenditure relating to such treatment, medicines,
hospitalisation and other ancillary medical requirements shall be borne by the
State Government. The State Government shall also provide and bear the
travelling and lodging expenses of the petitioner and one attendant whenever
required for the purpose of treatment pursuant to the directions contained
herein. The petitioner shall approach the authorities of Gauhati Medical College
& Hospital within a period of 10 (ten) days from today and upon such approach
being made, the respondent authorities shall take immediate steps for
continuation of the treatment process in accordance with the recommendations
of the Medical Board.
19. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE
Comparing Assistant