‘Biggest challenge was to prove snakebite was not natural’

The biggest challenge faced by prosecution during the trial of Uthra murder case was proving the snakebite was homicidal and not natural. “The prosecution had to establish Uthra was killed by the cobr

The biggest challenge faced by prosecution during the trial of Uthra murder case was proving the snakebite was homicidal and not natural. “The prosecution had to establish Uthra was killed by the cobra, its bite wan not natural and it was planted by her husband. Since the crime took place inside a closed room with no witnesses, we had to build the case on scientific and circumstantial evidence,” special prosecutor G Mohanraj told The Hindu.

Before filing the chargesheet, the investigating officers studied two similar cases reported from Puna and Allahabad where a poisonous snake was used as a murder weapon. Persons accused in both cases were acquitted since the prosecution couldn’t even prove the death was caused by snake venom. “We went through the judgement of both cases to find the pitfalls and analyse possible legal snags. Even the smallest aspect was probed in detail to avoid loose ends.”

A team that included herpetologists, forensic experts, veterinary surgeons and officials from Forest and Animal Husbandry departments was formed to collect scientific evidence. “Usually, polyvalent antivenoms are used to neutralise the poison of different kinds of snakes and if we identify the exact poisonous species, we can go for monovalent antivenom. In Uthra’s case we used the monovalent to prove she was bitten by a cobra. Next task was to prove the bite was not accidental, but induced,” he said.