Safiya Malik

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana Division Bench of Justice N.S. Shekhawat and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur allowed a criminal appeal and, around 22 years after the incident, set aside the trial court’s judgment to acquit an accused husband who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for allegedly setting his pregnant wife on fire. The prosecution case was that kerosene was poured on the victim and she was set ablaze, leading to her death from extensive burns while she was about six to seven months pregnant. The Bench found the alleged motive— a dispute over separate residence—too weak and noted that it was implausible that such a minor disagreement would lead to murder.

A statement attributed to the deceased was recorded at a primary health centre by a police officer in the presence of a medical officer, on the basis of which an FIR was registered. After the victim’s death, the offence was altered to one under Section 302 IPC.

Also Read: Excess Payment Of Land Acquisition Compensation To A Few Landowners Doesn’t Invalidate Others’ Compensation; Supreme Court

During trial, the prosecution examined medical officers, family members of the deceased, police officials, and formal witnesses. Medical evidence recorded that the deceased had suffered nearly 99% burns with respiratory involvement. The defence contended that the deceased had bolted herself inside a room and committed suicide, and that the appellants had broken open the door to rescue her and took her for treatment. Defence witnesses were examined to support this version. The trial court convicted the accused, primarily relying on the dying declaration. The appeal challenged the conviction on grounds relating to the credibility, recording, and admissibility of the dying declaration, absence of corroborative injuries, improbability of motive, and consistency of the defence version.

The Division Bench examined the evidentiary value of the dying declaration and recorded that “a dying declaration enjoys almost a sacrosanct status as a piece of evidence… however, such dying declaration is relevant and admissible in evidence provided it has been made by the deceased, while in a fit and sound mental condition and is free from any embellishments, tutoring or external influence.”

The Court noted serious procedural lapses in the recording of the dying declaration and observed that “the doctors have been repeatedly directed to ensure that there is a contemporary endorsement on the dying declaration itself, first of all completely certifying the physical and mental condition of a victim.” It recorded that in the present case, “there was no certificate in his handwriting to show that the maker of the dying declaration was in a fit mental and physical condition at the time of making statement and remained so throughout.”

The Bench expressed concern over the role of the medical officer, stating that “it is shocking to note that PW-1 Dr. Jagtar Singh casually performed his duties” and further observed that “the endorsement under the dying declaration regarding the fitness certificate was written by the ASI himself and the doctor simply appended his signatures.”

On the contents of the declaration, the Court recorded that “once both the appellants had poured kerosene oil on her, there was no need to further beat her up,” noting that no medical witness found any marks of beating, which “raises serious question mark with regard to the genuineness of the dying declaration.”

The Court also took note of the surrounding circumstances and recorded that “it is equally possible that the family members of the deceased might have influenced her and may have tutored her, before making the alleged dying declaration.”

Evaluating the defence evidence, the Bench observed that “the version of the defence appears to be more probable,” particularly in light of eyewitness testimony regarding the bolted door and rescue efforts. It further recorded that “the bolt of the gate shown in the photograph was not straight and it was having a bend,” corroborating the defence case of forced entry.

On motive, the Court observed that “it is highly unbelievable that due to such a trivial dispute, a person would set his own wife on fire,” and noted that the alleged motive was weak and unsupported.

Finally, the Court concluded that “the trial Court had placed wrongly reliance on the dying declaration,” holding that “the statement was not trustworthy and credible and was liable to be rejected.”

Also Read: NGT Is Proper Forum For PPCB Closure And Power Disconnection Orders: P&H High Court Disposes Newspaper Proprietors’ Plea Alleging Coercive Action After Critical Reports

The Court recorded that “the appeal qua appellant No.2 stood abated in view of his death.” The present appeal is allowed,” and that “the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge are hereby set aside. The accused-appellant No.1 is acquitted of the charges framed against him. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.”

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Appellants: Mr. K.S. Kahlon, Advocate; Ms. Manveen Kahlon, Advocate
For the Respondent State: Mr. M.S. Bajwa, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab

Case Title: Teja Singh & Another v. State of Punjab
Neutral Citation: 2026: PHHC:005514-DB
Case Number: CRA-D-564-DB-2004
Bench: Justice N.S. Shekhawat, Justice Sukhvinder Kaur