TruthWave Investigation | September 2, 2026

The Supreme Court has reopened a question that should have been settled by enforcement: why does acid remain accessible for retail purchase despite safeguards issued after the Court’s 2013 directions?

What the Court is considering

On August 31, 2026, the Court asked the Union government to explain why retail acid sales should not be completely banned, or alternatively subjected to much stricter controls. It also sought information from states and Union Territories on acid attacks and pending cases and directed authorities to formulate rehabilitation measures for survivors.

The 2013 safeguards

The earlier framework required sellers to keep transaction records, verify identification, record the purpose of purchase, restrict sales to adults and declare existing stocks, with penalties for breaches.

The accountability gap

The central question is whether there is a functioning inspection and reporting chain capable of proving retailer compliance. A rule is only as effective as its monitoring and enforcement.

Why a new rule could still fail

If licensing databases are incomplete, transaction records are not audited or agencies do not know which sellers are active, stricter rules can reproduce the same enforcement gap.

What TruthWave will track

• The Centre’s response.
• State-by-state implementation.
• Licensed sellers and inspections where data are published.
• Violations and prosecutions.
• Rehabilitation measures for survivors.

Sources

Supreme Court proceedings as reported by PTI, Economic Times and Times of India | Historical directions summarized by LiveLaw.

The Supreme Court has not imposed a nationwide retail ban through this proceeding.