Delhi HC Upholds Conviction of Husband and Son in Wife’s Burning Death Case [Read Judgment]

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court, in a judgment delivered recently, dismissed the appeal (CRL.A. 366/2002) filed by Didar Singh and Maan Singh, upholding their conviction under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Gian Kaur, Didar Singh’s wife and Maan Singh’s mother. The Court noted that the case was a tragic instance of a mother being murdered by her husband and son, and it hinged primarily on two consistent dying declarations made by the deceased before she succumbed to 100% burn injuries.

The facts of the case date back to April 5, 2000, when Gian Kaur was found engulfed in flames on the terrace of her house in the early morning hours. Her daughter, Taranjeet Kaur, and son, Maan Singh, took her to Safdarjung Hospital. While at the hospital, she made her first dying declaration to the treating doctor, Dr. Mohit Goel (PW-1), stating that her husband, Didar Singh, and her son, Maan Singh, had poured kerosene oil on her and set her ablaze. A second, consistent dying declaration was subsequently recorded by the Investigating Officer, ASI Ved Singh (PW-16), in the presence of her sister-in-law, Surinder Kaur (PW-3), where she repeated the same allegations. Gian Kaur died later that night at around 11:15 PM.

The appeal challenged the conviction on the grounds that the dying declarations were unreliable because the deceased had 100% burns and was allegedly not in a condition to speak coherently, and that the family only spoke Afghani, a language the authorities did not understand. It was further argued that the death was a case of suicide. The High Court bench, comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav, rejected these submissions. Justice Yadav, authoring the judgment, observed that the doctor’s endorsement (Ex. PW22/A) confirmed that the patient was “fit for statement.” The Court reiterated that a truthful and voluntary dying declaration, even without corroboration, is sufficient to base a conviction, relying on established legal precedents.

In addition to the consistent dying declarations, the Court highlighted several incriminating circumstances indicating a deliberate attempt to clean the crime scene and suggesting homicidal intent. ASI Ved Singh deposed that the terrace—the place of incident—had been cleaned, with no trace of burning. The investigating officers also found no cot, mattress, matchbox, candle, or kerosene container at the spot, all of which would ordinarily be present in a case of accident or suicide. Moreover, the Court noted that Didar Singh, the husband, remained at home and did not accompany his critically burnt wife to the hospital, despite being present at the time of the incident. The Court also found no evidence of matrimonial discord or any motive strong enough for the deceased to commit suicide and falsely implicate her own husband and son.

The Court concluded that the cumulative circumstances, combined with the consistent dying declarations, made a “foolproof case” against the appellants. The judgment recorded that during the pendency of the appeal, Appellant Didar Singh had passed away, and Appellant Maan Singh had absconded and was declared a proclaimed offender. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the Trial Court’s judgment of conviction and sentence.

Case Name: Didar Singh & Anr. v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Case Number: CRL.A. 366/2002

Court: High Court of Delhi
Bench: Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav

Date of Decision: 14 November 2025

Advocates: Mr. Rakesh Tewari (for Appellants), Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP (for Respondent/State)

[Read Judgment]