“Poot Kapoot Sune Hai Par Na Maata Sunee Kumaata”: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction Of Son & Husband Who Allegedly Set Ablaze Woman

The Delhi High Court has upheld the conviction of a husband and his son who allegedly set ablaze a woman in the year 2000, who was their wife and mother, respectively.

The Court was deciding a Criminal Appeal filed by the accused persons challenging the Judgment of the Trial Court, by which they were convicted.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav remarked, “A mother is the only person who carries you for nine months in her belly, three years in her arms and forever in her heart”. … The bond between the mother and children is so strong, pure and aboveboard that there is no scope for any sort of selfishness. There is a famous line in a song which goes as under that “Poot kapoot sune hai par na maata sunee kumaata.”

The Bench observed that the incident was neither accidental, nor suicidal, thereby, leaving only possibility of the same being homicidal and the evidences indicate that it was a murder.

Advocate Rakesh Tewari appeared for the Appellants/Accused, while APP Aashneet Singh appeared for the Respondent/State.

Facts of the Case

In April 2000, the deceased woman was sleeping on the terrace of her house and in the early morning hours, an alarm was raised by some neighbours. Thereafter, her daughter reached at the terrace where she allegedly found her mother in flames. She somehow took her mother to the hospital with the help of her brother. The deceased was admitted to the hospital in 100% burnt condition. The doctor, apart from administering treatment, also ascertained the cause of the burn injuries, where she allegedly disclosed that her husband and son poured kerosene oil over her and set her ablaze. This, ultimately turned out to be her first dying declaration.

Subsequently, the second dying declaration was recorded by the Investigating Officer (IO), where she again blamed both her husband and son, asserting that they had set her on fire after pouring kerosene oil. Ultimately, she succumbed to her injuries and at the time of second statement, her sister-in-law was also present and she affixed her impression on the statement as token of its correctness. Consequently, a case was registered under Sections 302, 201, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and both the accused were found guilty. The case of the prosecution was primarily based upon the dying declarations of the deceased and other circumstantial evidence. Being aggrieved, the accused persons were before the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the above facts, said, “During the pendency of the appeal, Mann Singh absconded and was declared a proclaimed offender whereas Didar Singh left this mortal world. Against the backdrop of these facts and circumstances, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the death was in fact a case of suicide.”

The Court enunciated that it is not necessary that a dying declaration must be recorded by a Magistrate and a dying declaration may be recorded by a doctor, a policeman, or even any other person, and so long as the statement satisfies the requirement of being genuine and made by the person in a fit state of mind, it can be accepted.

“Therefore, the contention that a special Executive Magistrate was not involved or called for recording the statement has no bearing on the fate of a dying declaration”, it added.

The Court observed that the condition of the deceased was extremely critical due to 100% burns, and therefore the dying declaration was recorded and the statements recorded first by the doctor and subsequently by the Investigating Officer cannot be faulted, particularly when both are consistent with each other, and in both, the deceased attributed responsibility to her husband and son for the circumstances leading to her condition.

“Death can either be an accident, a suicide, or a homicide. In the present case, it is neither of the first two, as there are no traces suggesting that the fire was accidental or that the deceased committed suicide. In that eventuality there would have been signs at the spot indicating that kerosene oil and matchstick were used. It is not that the kitchen was on the terrace or victim was using fire and kerosene to do something at about 6:00 or 7 AM. The site plan (without scale) Exhibits PW-23/A and (with scale) PW-4/A reflects nothing to suggest case of suicide as some evidence or material has to be there to indicate that deceased had committed suicide”, it further noted.

The Court remarked that it is impossible that the deceased brought kerosene oil and matchstick from the kitchen or from another place, poured the oil over her and set herself on fire, and then took the oil container and the matchstick back to some other place or from where she had brought it, as nothing could be found at the spot.

“Furthermore, items such as the cot, the mattresses, traces of burn marks on floor or any side walls or spilled or splashed kerosene oil, the container in which the oil was brought, the matchbox or any such thing which was used to put on the fire or affected by fire should have been found at the spot, had it been an accident or suicide. In such situations, the family’s focus must be on providing the medical treatment to the deceased and not on cleaning the site of incident”, it added.

Conclusion

The Court was of the view that the dying declarations in itself are acceptable because there was no reason with the doctor to record something which was not stated by the victim.

“The dying declaration is evidently acceptable and in these circumstances can be acted upon. Since there is no specific format for recording dying declaration or for that matter, who can record or must record, therefore, the statements recorded by the Doctor and Police Officer cannot be faulted. The truthfulness of the dying declaration can further be inferred from the fact that the deceased, under severe pain and trauma, had repeated and recorded as well in the statement of PW-16 that she was unable to speak properly but then in the same breath she had blamed her husband and son for the situation in which she had landed. As such the dying declaration in itself is sufficient to hold the appellants responsible”, it also said.

Moreover, the Court observed that dying declaration is not only consistent but appears to be true and the deceased had no reason to name her grown up son or husband to falsely implicate them.

“She had nothing to gain. As such the dying declaration, being above board, free from any taint like undue influence, fabrication, pressure, inducement or for any temporal gain, being acceptable leaves no room for the appellants to scrape through the conclusion that they were responsible to set Gian Kaur on fire resulting in to her death, which was neither suicidal nor accidental”, it concluded.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal and upheld the conviction.

Cause Title- Didar Singh & Anr. v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) [Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:9973-DB)

Click here to read/download the Judgment