Uthra Case : 27 Circumstances Which Proved Murder Using Live Cobra

The cold-blooded murder of a 25-year-old differently-abled woman in Kerala had shaken the public conscience for a sundry of reasons; particularly for its insensitivity. 

It was not the first time a natural snake bite was weaponised to cover up a planned murder in the country. But it was a first in the State.

"For the first time in the history of Kerala, the modus operandi of using a live cobra as a weapon for murder was adopted, for inflicting deadly envenomation on a hapless victim who was bedridden." 

Perhaps for this reason, the Police and the prosecution were hell-bent on deciphering the truth behind Uthra's death. And hence commenced a comprehensive investigation that led to the filing of a 1,000 paged charge sheet.

When the matter reached the Court, the prosecution was presented with the biggest of hurdles to prove the guilt of the husband in the case; all it had was an extensive collection of circumstantial evidence.

How did the prosecution overcome this hurdle? How did it manage to link 29 circumstances to drive home a solid case; solid enough to lead to the first-ever conviction in the country for a murder induced by fatal snakebite? 

Read on to find out. 

What Happened To Uthra?

On 7th May 2020, Manimekhala went to her daughter Uthra's bedroom to find her lying motionless with her left hand hanging out of the cot, her mouth wide open. 

Upon raising alarm, Uthra was taken to the hospital where she succumbed to death. The doctors informed the unconsolable family that she died from a snake bite. Later, it was identified to be that of a cobra's venom.

Despite several attempts to camouflage the murder as a mythical 'serpentine curse', Uthra's parents were convinced it was not a case of a natural snake bite. They demanded an investigation. 

Why Were Uthra's Parents Suspicious?

Uthra's family had compelling reasons to suspect that their daughter's death was a murder. Less than two months ago, she was taken to the hospital for a mysteriously identical incident - a snake bite while she was fast asleep. Only that time, it was a viper that had attacked her.

The fact that Uthra had complained of seeing a viper in her matrimonial home the week before the first incident strengthened their hunch.

Curiously, on all three occasions, Uthra's husband Suraj was in close proximity. Under such circumstances, her parents did not think twice before pointing an accusing finger at Suraj, Uthra's husband and the father of their 2-year-old son. 

Who Is Chavarukavu Suresh? How Did He Turn An Approver?

Suraj was found to have purchased both the snakes, namely the viper and the cobra from Chavarukavu Suresh, a notable snake handler. The retrieved call details proved that the duo was in contact throughout the months during which Suraj made his attempts to eliminate Uthra. 

Accordingly, Suresh was arrested along with Suraj and arrayed as the 2nd accused when the murder came to light. However, while undergoing judicial custody, he filed an application stating that he was willing to give a disclosure statement.

Upon verifying, the Chief Judicial Magistrate tendered pardon upon Suresh, and he was accordingly deleted from the array of the accused and made an approver. 

The 27 Circumstances That Helped Prosecution Prove The Murder:

The prosecution proved the case solely relying on circumstantial evidence. In the Indian legal system, to convict an accused based on circumstantial evidence, all the circumstances proved should point out only to the guilt of the accused, not to a hypothesis that points to his innocence. 

In this case, the prosecution successfully proved 27 out of the 29 circumstances relied on to prove the guilt of the accused. They were as follows:

1. Uthra died due to unnatural and homicidal Cobra envenomation.

2. In January 2020, Uthra's parents decided to take her back to their residence as cruelty meted out to Uthra became unbearable. They asked Suraj to return all the assets he had received on account of the marriage. Hearing this demand, the accused interfered, redeemed their confidence and managed to convince Uthra to stay in his home. 

3. The accused searched about snakes and snake handlers frequently from January 2020 onwards and contacted Suresh, the snake handler and met him in person on 18.2.2020. 

4. After the meeting dated 18.2.2020, the accused requested Suresh for a demonstration of snakes at his house with venomous snakes. When he came to know about Suresh catching a viper on 24.2.2020, he requested Suresh for a demonstration on the very next day and offered an amount of Rs.10,000/- as consideration.

5. On 26.2.2020 at 5.20 a.m., Suresh handed over Russell's Viper to the accused, for Rs. 10,000 in the presence of one Premjith.

6. On the same day after one hour, a demonstration with snakes were conducted at the instance of the accused. The accused handled a snake without any fear and with skills in that demonstration.

7. On 27.2.2020, Uthra was confronted with a snake on the landing space of the staircase when she went to the upstairs bedroom for taking Suraj's mobile phone as instructed by him. Uthra screamed on seeing the snake and then Suraj took it away in a sack.

8. Uthra sustained an unnatural and lethal hemotoxic envenomation on 3.3.2020 when she was in the upstairs bedroom with the accused.

9. There was an unexplained and long delay in taking Uthra to the hospital even after identifying the bite.

10. The history offered by the accused regarding snake bites to doctors and relatives were false and unbelievable. 

11. While Uthra was undergoing treatment at Pushpagiri Medical College, Suraj searched for Cobra and contacted Suresh for venomous Cobra for consideration. Suresh reciprocated the demand after catching a Cobra on 23.4.2020.

12. On 24.4.2020, Suresh proceeded to Eenath wherein he met Suraj and after paying Rs.7,000/-, Suraj purchased the Cobra.

13. On 6.5.2020 Suraj came to Uthra's residence with a shoulder bag after creating an impression that he arrived due to her compulsion. 

14. On 6.5.2020 Suraj slept in Uthra's bedroom and unusually woke up early in the morning and went out of the room with no care for how abnormally Uthra was lying on the bed due to the snakebite.

15. Though the fact of snakebite was not known to anyone when Uthra was brought to the hospital, Suraj disclosed the site of the bites to the doctor and gave false information to his in-laws that doctor mentioned about a snake bite on her hand.

16. The conduct of the accused in connection with the detection of snakes in the room.

17. Uthra was last seen with the accused on both the occasions of snake bites and the accused failed to explain as to the transaction underwent in that room and to discharge his burden U/S 106 of Evidence Act. 

18. False plea of alibi.

19. On both occasions of snake bites, Uthra was stupefied with drugs without her knowledge.

20. Extra judicial confession made by Suraj to Suresh on 9.5.2020 by using the mobile phone of one Eldose.

21. The accused surfed the web regarding vipers just before the Viper attack and about Cobras and cobra venom extraction just before the Cobra bite.

22. In proximity to Viper bite and Cobra bite, he was in possession of respective snakes and the need-basis communication between Suresh and the accused.

23. An unexplained image of a snake found in the accused's phone gallery as retrieved in the Cyber Forensic examination. ( The court did not accept this as an incriminating circumstance, as the species of the snake was not clear from the photograph.)

24. Recovery of the plastic jar which was used by Suresh to keep the Cobra while handing it over to the accused.

25. Conduct of accused at each stage of transactions.

26. Extra judicial confession before the Forest officials under the Wild Life (Protection) Act. (The Court did not accept this as proved).

27. Non-explanation or false explanation of entire proved circumstances.

28. Uthra was a differently-abled girl and the accused married her knowing the same. After the marriage accused catered an ill will towards her on account of her mental condition. 

29. Motive of accused to retain assets he received and being received on account of the marriage and to project the murder as a natural and serpentine curse.

Why The Bite Marks Were Found Unusual:

Dr. Ragesh. R conducted Uthra'a post-mortem examination. According to his opinion, the bite marks found on her body appeared to be unusual due to the following reasons:-

(1). Two successive bites.

(2). The two bites were in close proximity.

(3). Wider than usual bite marks.

(4). Significant difference between the fang width of both bite marks. 

Moreover, the Chemical Analysis Report revealed a non-therapeutic level of Cetirizine. The cumulative effect of all these circumstances made accidental snakebite improbable.

The last meal had by Uthra could be within 6 hours of her death. According to him, the approximate time of death could be 2.30 a.m, i.e, approximately 12 hours prior to commencement of post-mortem. 

Natural Entry Of A Cobra To The Crime Scene Impossible: The Prosecution's Version

(a) Windows

The crime scene bedroom had 3 windows. The window in the dressing room on the northern side was 115 cm from the ground when measured from outside. The two windows in the bedroom on the eastern side wall were at a height of 122 cm from the ground when measured from outside.

Scientifically, it is known that any snake can raise its body without any support for a maximum of one-third of the body length. In this case, the length of the Cobra is 152 cm. A cobra of body length 152 cm cannot raise its head to a height beyond 50 cm.

A natural entry of a 152 cm length Cobra through any window, therefore, was not possible. Moreover, a Cobra cannot climb a flat surface vertically without support. So natural entry through any of the 3 windows was ruled out.

(b) Bathroom ventilator & Exhaust fan

The bathroom ventilator is located at 210 cm from the ground level of the building when measured from outside. A 2.5 inch smooth vertical PVC pipe is seen at 9.5 cm away from the ventilator. One side of the pipe is affixed to the outside wall and the top end of the pipe is 267 cm above the ground. It is not possible for the cobra to climb to the height of the ventilator vertically.

The above-mentioned PVC pipe was also insufficient for assisting a cobra to climb. Natural entry through this way was hence ruled out.

(c) Bath Room Drainage

This possibility is ruled out as the drain plate cover is permanently fixed inside the bathroom.

(d) Main door of the bedroom

The gap between the bottom edge of the main door and the floor was measured to be 2 to 4 mm. Hence, the possibility of a natural entry of a cobra of the mentioned size underneath the closed door was ruled out.

(e) Air holes

There were 3 air holes in the room; all of them sealed and blocked. So the possibility of a natural entry of a cobra through air holes can be ruled out.

Hence the possibility of natural entry of cobra into the bedroom at the northeastern side of the house can be ruled out if the main door of the bedroom remains closed.

Difference In Fang Widths Gave Away The Murder Plot

On examination of the bite marks on the hand of Uthra, the fang width was found to be varying at 2.3 and 2.8 cms. Mavish Kumar. M. V, a Herpetologist testified that on the basis of his experience and studies, a Cobra with such a large fang width did not exist. The normal fang width of a Cobra is 1 to 1.6 cms.

When the fact that Uthra had sustained a fatal bite late at night was analysed it was more convincing that it was not a natural snake bite.

The Accused Caused Uthra's Death Using Venom:

The Court confirmed that venom is a type of poison. Stripped to the bare essentials, in essence, the charge against the accused was that he administered a type of poison on Uthra and caused her death. 

There are three propositions that the prosecution must establish in a case of poisoning:

(a) that death took place by poisoning

(b) that the accused had the poison in his possession

(c) that the accused had an opportunity to administer the poison to the deceased.

The prosecution emerged victorious in its expedition to prove the said three propositions, thereby establishing the guilt of the accused. 

How They Proved The Failed Attempt To Murder: 

The treatment records of Uthra discharge summary and photographs were indicative of a Russell's viper bite.

The bite mark was oblique, on the outer aspect of the right leg about 20 cm above the ankle. Experts confirmed that such a bite was possible only in a lying position.

Moreover, a Russell's viper bite is associated with excruciating pain and is hemotoxic in nature. The victims of such bites would respond immediately due to unbearable pain under normal circumstances.

However, Uthra was sound asleep when the reptile attacked her and woke up only when the pain became unbearable. This suggested that she was under sedation when the viper bit her. 

The Court also analysed the possibility of natural entry of a Russell's viper to site:

Location 1- Staircase landing: Normal entry of a Russell's Viper to this place was be ruled out as they are non-climbing in nature.

Location 2 – Bedroom: The possibility of natural entry of a Russell's viper to the bedroom on the first floor of the house was ruled out. The possibility of a natural bite of a Russell's viper on a victim sleeping on a bed in the bedroom on the first floor of the house was also ruled out.

All these factors were suggestive of an induced bite.

Scientific Evidence Relied On:

Apart from direct evidence and circumstantial evidence, the prosecution relies on scientific evidence like call detail records, mobile phone tower decoding data, internet search history, and other electronic records to prove the case. The call detail records and internet protocol records are accompanied by Customer Application Forms (CAF) by the users of the mobile phone connection. 

The Internet search history of the accused, as per the cyber forensic report discloses that he made repeated searches for Viper snakes, kuzhimandali snakes and Chavarukavu Suresh, from 31.10.2019 to 10.28 pm on 2/3/20. The time 10.28 pm on 2/3/20 is relevant as it is on that night Uthra sustained a viper bite.

Charges Against The Accused:

- Section 302

The prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused has caused homicidal induced Cobra bites on Uthra in the night of 6/05/2020, which has caused the fatal envenomation resulting in her death. 

On 2.3.2020, the accused had made another attempt to cause fatal envenomation by inflicting Viper bite on Uthra. She survived because of medical treatment. an unsuccessful attempt by placing the Viper on the landing of the staircase and sending Uthra in that direction. These facts are relevant U/s. 14 of Evidence Act. 

The prosecution proved that Uthra, who was sedated sustained two homicidal, induced Cobra bites which caused the fatal envenomation and it was sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death. 

In the said circumstances, it was held that the accused has caused the death of Uthra with the intention of causing her death. The act of the accused does not come within any of the exceptions U/S 300 I.P.C and it amounts to murder as defined U/S 300 I.P.C. Thus the prosecution has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the murder of Uthra and committed the offence punishable u/s 302 I.P.C.

- Section 307

The prosecution also proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has attempted to murder Uthra by inflicting Viper bite on the night of 2/03/20 and has committed offence punishable U/S 307 I.P.C.

-Section 328

On both occasions when Uthra sustained envenomation, the accused had administered stupefying drugs or sedative tablets to Uthra and attempted to murder her and has caused death by inflicting Cobra envenomation. The death was also caused by administering Cobra venom, a poison. Section 328 I.P.C is an independent offence. Thus, the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed offence U/S 328 I.P.C

- Section 201

The accused had caused the disappearance of evidence in a murder case by washing the glass in which he gave sedative mixed juice to Uthra and destroying the stick with which he handled the snake. Thus, the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the offence U/ S 201 I.P.C. 

What Was The Sentence Imposed On The Accused?

(i) Imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,00,000/- for the commission of offence punishable u/s 302 I.P.C

(ii) Imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.50,000/- for the commission of offence punishable u/s 307 I.P.C 

(iii) Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 25,000/- for the commission of offence punishable u/s 328 I.P.C

(iv) Rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- for the commission of offence punishable u/s 201 I.P.C

Although the sentences of term imprisonments imposed for the offences u/s 328 and 201 I.P.C shall run consecutively at first, it was clarified that the sentences of imprisonment for life will commence after the term imprisonment awarded is undergone by the accused and shall run concurrently. 

Why Wasn't Death Sentence Awarded To The Accused?

The Prosecution had vehemently pressed for a death sentence to be awarded to the accused considering that the murder had shocked the collective conscience of the society.

It was argued that although cases of uxoricide may be common, the mode of execution and the diabolic plan of the accused to murder his bedridden wife qualified it to fit in the category of rarest of the rare. 

For the first time in the history of Kerala, the modus operandi of using a live Cobra as a weapon for murder was adopted, for inflicting deadly envenomation on a hapless victim who was bedridden, the Prosecution put forth. 

However, the Court established that it had to consider the mitigating circumstances in favour of the accused.

"No doubt the murder is diabolic, ghastly, brutal and heinous...the offence was committed with unparalleled wickedness and in a ghastly manner. The accused had repeatedly pursued his intent to murder Uthra."

The Court found that the accused had no criminal antecedents. In the absence of any criminal antecedents, the young age of the accused would be a mitigating circumstance. 

The accused is presently 28 years old.

"In the said circumstances the chances of reformation of the accused cannot be said to be foreclosed and the case does not fall in the category of rarest of the rare so as to award death sentence."

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment