‘I want to educate people about honour killings’

Toronto: An Indo-Canadian man serving a life sentence in a jail in Canada for murdering three people, including his sister, says he will educate people about honour killings if he is released from prison.

A parole board in Canada has denied Daljit Singh Dulay’s plea for unescorted passes from jail and day parole, the Calgary Herald reported today.

Dulay was convicted for murdering his sister, Kulwinder Dulay, then 20, her husband, Gurdawr Singh Dulay, 28, and a friend, Mukesh Kumar Sharma, 28, in 1991 in case of honour killing.

In his appeal to the parole board, Daljit said that he believed that the honour killings were wrong and he would speak out against this once he got out of prison.

He will be eligible for parole in 2016 after serving 25 years in prison.

According to the report, Daljit killed his sister, her husband and the friend at a parking lot of the Marlborough residential area of Calgary in the Canadian province of Alberta.

Daljit was told by his family to do “whatever it takes” to break the marriage of his sister to Gurdawr, a man the family disapproved.

The woman and the man were reportedly from the same village and, according to the Sikh religion, they could be considered cousins.

Dalbir hired a private investigator to find his sister after she had eloped with Gurdawr in September 1990 and moved to Calagary from Vancouver.

He then bought an assault rifle and gunned down the duo and Sharma, who also happened to be his brother-in-law’s landlord and employer and had arranged the duo’s marriage.

The parole ruling said that Daljit believed that he would be deported to India once he was released from prison.

It said that though Daljit claimed that he would speak out about honour killings once he returned to his village in India, he could provide little details when asked how he would do so.

“You stated several times during the hearing that honour killings were wrong and stupid, and that you were very ashamed and remorseful for your actions,” the board was quoted as writing in its ruling.

“You could not provide specific information on how you would be assertive and stand up to those who may still find you a hero or pressure you to somehow be involved or condone honour killing beliefs, other than to say you would just say ‘no’ and walk away. During your final words, you said that your goal was to educate your younger family members with respect to honour killings.”

The board said that it denied him his appeals because the risk level was undue and and also because it was concerned about his lack of insight on honour killings.


The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by authors, news service providers on this page do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of Hill Post. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual. Hill Post makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site page.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.