i-CffHCOURT QF CHHATTES6ARH AT BItASPUft Crimino) Appaal No. 3288 of 1999 APPELLANT: RE5PONDENT: APPELLANT: RESPON&ENT: - Versus - Budhwaria Bai State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh) AND Cr-iminal Appeal No. 704 of 2000 - Versus - Shyam Prasod State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh), i. A. i ~ JUD6MENT roft CONSI&ERATIOM Sd/- L.C.BHADOO Judge ^i u oe 6 12-4-2007 ••^^-.^. HQN^LE MR, JUSTICE &HIREN&RA AAISHRA ^ e^,c-C- Sd/- Dhu^ndraMishra| Judge -4-2007 POST FOR PRONOUNCEMENT : ^^uffMENT ON^^APRIL, 2007 Sd/- "-•il /3A-4-2007 ^ -"^ ^- ^- ; HISH COUftT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT 6ILASPUR APPELLANT/: (Accused) (In jail) RESPONDENT: APPELLANT/': (Accused) (In jail) RESPONDENT: Criminai Appeoi No.328S of 1999 - Versus - Budhtvaria Bai. Widow of Nankun 6ond, A9ed cbout 50 y-ears, R/o Nawagaon, Police Station; Kota, Ustrict: Bilaspur- (M.P.) (nowC.6.) State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh), Through the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bilaspur (AIP.) (now C.&.) AND Criminoi Aspeo! No. 704 i»f2000 - Versus - Shyatfi Prasad, S/o Janak Prasad AAishra, Aged about 28 years, R/o NaH'Q9aon, Police Station: Kota, bistrict: Bilaspur (MP.) (nowC.S.) State of Madhya Pradesh (now ChhattiS9orh), Through the Superintendent. Central-Jail, Bilaspur (MP.) (now C.6.} Present: - ,Mr. Abhay Tiwari, Advocate: Mr. U.N.S. &eo, Addl. Public Prosecutor: For the appellants. For the State/respondent. MVISION BENCH: - HON'BLE Mt. L.C. BHA&OO ANt> HON'BLE MR. (SHIREN&ftA AUSHRA. JJ, JUti6MENT (Deiivered on IS^ April, 2007) The foliowinq .iudqment ofthe Court was deiivered by i..C. Bhgidoo. J - ^ ^^s3^£'^'w^^^'i^^~a^^^^?^^"^S^£^\^^^'>i^^:^^--..^^^ Page 2 of 13 *Wtt 1. Criminal Appeal No.3288/1999 filed by Budhwaria Bai and Criniinal Appeal ^- No.704/2000 filed by Shyam Prosad are arising out of the same judgment passed by the Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Sessions Trial No.275/98, therefore, they are bein9 disposed of bythis common judgment. 2. By these appeals, the accused/appellants have questioned le9ality and correctness of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16 Ssptember, 1999 passed by the Sessions Jud9e, Bilaspur, in Sessions Triat No.275/98, whereby learned Sessions Judge after holdin9 the accused/ appellants guilty for committing the murder of Santram & Itwari - sons of accused Sudhwaria Bai, by adminis.tering thero the poisonous substance i.e. root of yellow oieander, convicted both of them under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonmerit for life and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for two years. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Budhwaria Bai is the mother of deceased Santram & Itwari. She has another son nsmely, Sukhram. She gavz birth to these three sons out of her wedlock with Nankun 6ond. As Nankun 6ond died, BudhwariaBai, was living separately, whereas the two deceased sons as u'ell as another son Sukhram were living separately. Caae ofthe prosecution is that Budhwaria Bai fell in love with co-accused Shyam Prasad - neighbour of Budhwaria Bai, therefore, Shyam Prasad used to visit the house of Budhwaria Bai frequently, which was not liked by the deceased sons of Budhwaria Bai. They wsre objectin9 the coming of Shyam Prasad to the rssicfence of their mother Budhwaria Bai. In this connection, even the meetin9 of Panchayat of Villa9e; Nawagaon was convened for that notice Ex.P-14 was issued to Santram, Itwari & Sukhram. Sarpanch Mohanlal Shrivas (PW-11) admonished Santram &. Itwari and also advised Shyam Prasad not to visit the house of Budhwaria Bai. The said objection of Santrom & Itwari was not liked by the accused/appellants, therefore, they decided to eliminate Santram & Itwari and for that purpose, they formed a common intention and in furtherance of that common intention, ultimately, on 1-3-1998, the accused persons procured the root of yellow oleunder from one Parmanand (PW-4), thereafter, accused Shyam Prasad crushed the root of yellow oleander on a stone and 9ave it to Budhwaria Bai who mixed it in •t-he food cooked by her. SantramA Itwari consumed the same, they started vorritin9 and their condition becams precarious. They ultimately died on account of consumption of the poisonous substance i.e. root of ysHow oieander. Budhwaria Bai with the help of viiia9ers, took Santram & Itwari to \ Page 3 of 13 ^^ ffffs Police Station: Kota and reported the matter. The soid information was entered In Roznamcha at serial No.lS and in turn,the Police Station sent Santram A Itwari alon9 with Constable &angaram for medical exomination to Community Health Centre, Kota where &r. Jagat Sin9h Dhakar (PW-7) after examination on 1-3-1998 at 3.45 p.m. reported that Santram was brought dead and Itwari was in unconscious condition, there was slow pulse beat, pupiis were dituted and condition was precarious,therefore, after preparin9 the report Ex.P-4'C' he advised that Itwari be- qdmitted in District Hospital, Bilaspur, but after some time, Itwari also died on account of consumption of the poisonous substance. Further case of the prosecution is that Budhwaria Bai made extra judicial confession before Aaju Singh (PW-8) & Janu Sin9h (PW-10). Shyam Prcsad also made extra judicial confession before Aaju Singh (PW-8). Budhwaria Bai cleaned the first vomiting substance of Santram & Itwari from the place of occurrence. 4. After receivin9 ths report, the Investi9atin9 Officer ieft for the scene of occurrence and geized the root of yeiiow oleander from Pormancnd under Ex.P-lO'A'. He gave application Ex.P-3 to the doctor of Community Health Cen+re, Kota regardin9 examination of Santram and the doctor gave report Ex.P-3'A' regQrdin9 the death of Santram. Similarly in respect of Itwari, the Poiice Offieer gave application Ex.P-4 regarding the condition of Itwari on which the doctor 9ave his report Ex.P-4'C'. Aft-er giving notice Exs.P-5 iSi P-6 to the Panchas, the Investigating Officer prepared inquest Ex.P-7 on the body of Santram and Ex.P-8 on the body of Itwari. While in police custody, Budhwaria Bai 9ave memorandum Ex.P-9 regarding the money she received from Shyam Prasad on account of her iiiicit r-elations with him and in pursuance of that Rs.72/- were seized under- Ex.P-10 ct the instance of Budhwaria Bai. Accused ShyQm Prasad 9ave information Ex.P-11 regar'ding the place w'nere he had kept the stone with which the root of yeliow olesnder was crushed and in pursusnce of that the stone was seized under Ex.P-12. Notiee Ex.P-14 yyen to Sukhram, deceased Santram & Itwari by the Sarpanch for their appearanee before the Panchayat in connection with harassment of their mother by them, was seized by the Investigating Officer under Ex.P-13. Dr. Jogat Singh 9ave letter Ex.P-15 to the Station House Offieer, Police Station: Kota regarding the death of Itwari. Merg intimation Exs.P-16 d P-17 were given to the Station House officer, Police Stdrt'ion; Kota. Vomitin9 substance of Santr'amA Itwari were coliected fromthepiace ofoccurrence under Exs.P-lSd Ex.P- 19, respectively. The ieft out vegetables mixed with the root ofyeliow oieander alon9 Page4ofl3 with the utensii ware seized from the house of accused Bucihwaria Bai under tx.P-20. <^. Post-mortem on ths body of Santram was eonducted by Dr. A.K. Jha (PW-15), hs submitted report Ex.P-21'A' and opined that the deoth was on account of GSphyxia, but no definite opinion can be given regardin9 the cause of dea+h. Post-mortem on the body of Itwcri was conducted by &F. Satish Kumar Shrivastava (PW-14), he gave repori- Ex.P-33 and opined that the death was on account of asphyxia, but no definite opinion can be given regardin9 the cause of death. Seized vomiting substance,vegetables and other ar'ticles were sent to Forensie Seience Labor-atory, Sagar, from where repor-ts Exs.P-27& P-28 were received in which it wos opsned that vomiting substance and left- out ve9etables were containing the yeltow oieander substance. Site pian Ex.P-29ofthe place of occurrenee was prepared bythe Investigating Officer. 5. After completion ofinvestigation, charge sheet was filed intheCourt ofChief jLidicial .'iA^istrcte, Bilaspur, who in turn committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Bilaspur. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses at the tria!. Statements or the accused persons »'ere recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in iahich they denied the material appearin9 against them anct stated that they are innoeent. 6. Learned Sessions Jud9e ofter hearin9 counsel for respective parties, convicted ond sentenced the accused/appellants as aforementioned. 7. We have heard A'tr. Abhcy Tiwari, learned counsel for the appetlants cnd ,v. U.N.S. Deo, iear'ned Additional Pubiic Prosscutor on beholf of ths State/ responderit, perused the jud9ment and record of the trial Court. In this CGSe, there is no direct evidence. Whois case rests on the drcumstantiai evidence, In order to connect the aeeused persons with the murder of SantrQm & Itwari, the prosecution has tried to establish the following circumstances against the accused persons;- (1) Motive: The accused persons nameiy, Budhwaria Bai d Shy'am Prssad were havin9 iilicit relations which was not liked bydeceased Santram iSi Itwari - sons of accused Budhwaria Bai; (2) The accused persons, in order to remove Santram & Itwari from their way, sdministered the poisonous substance i.e. the rcot ofyeliow oleander; (3) Accused Budhwaria Bai made extra judicial confession before Aaju Sin9h (PW- 8) & Janu Singh (PW-10) and accused Shyam Prasad before Aaju Singh (PW-8). Page 5 or 13 'l. Rrst eircufrstoflce 9. Mr. Abhay Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellants, araued that the prosscution has not been able to establish motive of the accused persons to commit the murder of Santram & Itwari. 10. On the other hand, Mr. Deo, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. supported ths judgment of the triai Court. 11. In order to establish motive,the prosecution has examined the foilowin9 witnesses: - > Ra.ikumari (PW-2) - wife of deceased Itwari; - This witness has stated in her evidence that the deceased persons and thsir elder brother were residing together, whereas, aecused Budhwaria Bai was residng separateiy, as her husbcnd had already expired before her (PV|/-2) marricge. Relations of her mother-in-iaw Budhwaria Bd with her husband Itwari & brother-ir,- law Santram, were not cordial, they used to qusrrel. > Ramcharan (PW-3): - This witness has not supported the prosecution case fully, but he has stated in his evidence that accused Shy-am Prasad used to visit ths house of accussd Budhwaria Bai. > Parmanand (PW-4); - This switnsss has also stated in his evidence that accused persons Shyam Prasad & Budhwaria Bai eame to him and said that ths children cre harassin9 them, and demanded herb to keep the chitdren under control. He has further stated that he asked Budhwaria Bai to rnix the same in the food of her sons. They iw-il! be undsr control. > Anita Bd (PW-5) - dauqhter-in-law of Budhbt'aria Bai & s*'ife of Sukhrcm: - This witness hcs stated in her evidencs that accused Shyam Prasad used to visitthe house of accused BudhwariaBai frequentlyand on account of thaT Itu'ari iS. Santram cdvised Shyam Prasad not to visit the house oftheir mother. In cross- examination. she has gtated that reiations of Santram & Itafari with Budhwaria Bai were not cordial. > Sukhram (PW-6) - son of Budh»'ariaBai;- This witness hos stated in his evidence that accused Shyam Prasad used to keep paddy in their house, but later on he refused Shyam Prasad to keep his paddy Page 6 of 13 l UIL> / in their house. In cross-examination, he has stated thct his relations with Shyam Prasad were not cordial. Scntram (since deceased) disciosed him that there was fire in the threshing field of Shysm Prasaci, for that Shyair Pr-ssad iodged a report C9ai"st Itwari. > Mohanlal Shrivas (PW-11) - Sarpanch of Villaqe: Nawaqaon; - This witness has stated in his evidence that 'm the year 1998, Budhwaria Bffi was Panch of the 6ram Panchayot of his village, she complained ogainst hsr sons namely, Sukhram, Itwari <& Santram that they are objecting the visit of Shy'arn Prasad to her house, she furthe" disciosed that they are doubtmg her relationshio with Shyam Prasad as illicit and on aecount ofthat her "elations with Santram & Itwari have become sore. Budhwaria Bai made the complaint in writing, thsrefme, he called her sons by sencling a notiee and admonished Scntram, Itwari & SukhraiTi on which Sukhram asked that he is residin9 at Bilaspur, his mother Sucihwarici Bai ean come and reside with him at Biiaspur, that will soive the problem. Sukhram persuaded his mother Budhwaric Bd, but she did not shift to Biiaspur to reside with him. > Chsndra Prakash (PW-12^: - This witness has corroborated the above fact and stated that Sukhrarn convened a Panchayat in Dur'gci tempie in w'hich the accused persons were present, 10-15 persons were there and in which Sukhram diselosed that Shy'am Prasad is visiting their" house which is not liked by them, that is why he want tc take Budhwaria Bai to Bilaspur. But Budhwciria Bai refused to shift to Bilaspur. 12. Ex.P-14 is the notice, which was sent to the deceased persons & Sukhram by the Sarpanch to appea" befor-e him, as their mothei" has complained that they are harassing her and beating her. The said notice iifas seized by ths Investigating Officer under seizure memo Ex.P-13. 13. Therefore, evidence ofthe above witnesses as also the notice Ex.P-14 establishes thcri' the relations of deceased Santrom <Si Itwari as aiso Sukhram were not cordial with sccused/appellants Budhwaria Bai &. Shyam Prasad, as they were doubting relations between Shyam Pr-asad & Budhwaria Bai as iliicit. They were objecting the visit of Shyam Prasad to the house of their mother Budhwaria Bai. There is nothing in cross- examination of these witnesses to discredit their evidence. Therefore, on account of rtHT^iir?"-nrT"raWTnlriTW»iiumww(s;qw wguicttf^ni3^^ft^^wfliBfaw.at* nm^?^^ Page 7 of 13 continuous objection by the deceased persons, the accused persons had motive to eliminate Santram A Itwari in order to remove them from their way. Second circuinstaiice 14. As far as this cireumstance is concerned, learned counsel for the appeliants argueci that the prosecution has not been able to establish by adducin9 cogent evidence that the root of yellow o'eander was administered to the deceased persons namely, Santram & Itwari by the aeeused persons. He further argued that the root ofyellow oieander is not a poisonous substance and even administration of the root of yeilow o!eander cannot cause the death of human being. He slso submitted that there is no legal evidenee on record to establish that the substance in question was administered with intention to ceuse death of Santram & Itwcr-i. 15. On the other hsric!, learned Additionai Pubiic Pr-osecutor supported the judgnsnt ofthe trial Cou"t. 16. The Apex Court in the matter of Sha^d Birdhichuiid Sorda vs. State of rt<Aor<Bhtra reported in AIR 1984 SC 1622 hss held that "In the cases of murder by administration of poison the Court must carefuily scan the evidence and datermine the four important circumstances Kfhich alone can jus.tify a conviction: - (i) there is a clear motive for" an aecused to administer poison to the deceased; (ii) that the accused had the poison in his possession; (iii) that he had an opportunity to adniinister- the poison to the deceased; and (iv) that the deceased died of poison said to hove been administered." 17. As far as the first point is concerned, while discussing the first circumstancs it has been held that the aceused persons had definite motive to administer poison to the deceased persons, as the decessed persons were objectin9 the relations betweenthe accused persons. They were also objecting the visit of Shyam Prasad to Budhu'ariQ Bai's house. 18. As far as the second point is concerned, Parmanand (PW-4) 'na.s stated i;l his evidence that accused Shycm Prasad along with cccused Budhwaria Bai came and demondea herb saying that the children ore harassin9 them,theywant to keep them under control by 'irJftoWb^ir"! inTt^rtTI T :h7 fr' At?'FJ'! K:'* "'":?5*"':''"' ^ ^Mt '^ '' d iKT '' ^ Page 8 of 13 \.. administering herb, therefore, he gave The root of yellow oieander to Shyarn Prasad ^- and at that time, Budhwaria Bai was with Shyam Prasad. He qwe thrse pieces ofthe root of yellow oleander to Budhwaria Bd and asked her that the said substance can be administered to the children by mixing the same in food. l-1e has further stated that the Police came to him during investigstion and 'ne gave a piece of the root of yeltoi» oleander to the Police. same was seized under Ex.P-1. In cross-examination, this witness has stated thct Budhworia Bai disclosed to him that her sons are quar-reiiing with her, therefore, she be 9iven soms medicme in order to eontrol them and therefore, he gave the root of yeilow oleander to Budhw/cria Bai. 19. S.S. Rajput (PW-13) - Sub Inspector, has stated in his svidence that on 4-3-1998 h-3 seized the root of yeilow oleander under Ex.P-1 on being given by Parmanand, which bears his si9nature. Teejram (PW-1) has also stated in his evider-.ce that in his presence the Police seized the root ofyellow oieander frorri Parmariand under Ex.P-1. 20. Ashok Pandey (PW-9) has stated in his evidence that in his presence from the place of occurrence, the courtyard, and in the presence of Anita Bai, the soil containing vomiting substance was seized by the Police under Ex.P-18 and the vomitmg substancs of Itwari wos seized under Ex.P-19. Veytabie of potato and Jhurga were also ssizsd clong with utensil under Ex.P-10. This fact has been corrobor'ated by Anita Bai (PW-5). 21. 5.5. Rajput (PW-13) has stated that the seized articies were sent to Forensic Sciencs Labora+ory, Sasar for chemicai examination under Ex.P-26 o.nd the report Ex.s.?-27 &. P-28 were received. Psr-uscl of the report Ex.P-28 reveels that vomitirg subs'tance of cieceased Santrarn Ex.'A', •I'omiting substance af deceused Itwa.ri Ex.'C', veyetabies Ex.'E', "cot of yeliotw oleander Ex.'fi', viscera of Santra.il Exs.T' & 'J' arid viseera of Itwwi Exs.'A'i'&'N', after chemical excmination, iit.'ere found contdning y'ellow a!eande", Therefore, from the above evidence it is established that ths accused persons r,ar:-iely, Budhtt'Gria Bai A Shyam Prssad if'ere in possessio.-. of the root of y'siioiA' eleancer i.e. the poisonous SuDSTance. 22. ;Vtodi's Aledical Jurisprudence and Toxicotogy defines 'ysliow oleande"'. •> It is a plant be!ongin9 to Apocynaeeae, and is wideiy cultivatsd as an ornannenta! shrub in gardens in the plains in India. It has linear lanceolate leaves, targe,yel!oa¥ be!l-shcped flos'ers and a green, giobular fruit containing a sin9le nut, iight brounin cc'our and trian9ular in shape with two celis, each enciosing a pale ye'iow seed. Ti'»e plcnt is highlypoisonous, Eight milligrams injected into adog is'eighing about three :-.K».T'*:»?i'a<ar!a3EtBB<3aue^aa.cto.saa-isa'-luaiti.A-a Page 9 of 13 kilograms produces frothing ot the mouth, retching with vomitin9 and collapse, &nd causes death within an hour. <• Synytoms: - Burning pdn in the mouth and dryness of the throat, tingling ond numbness ofthe ton9ue,vomiting andoften diarrhoea, headache, dizziness, diiated pupils, ioss of muscular power, and fainting. The pulse is soft cnd slow which iater- becomes rspid, weak and irre9ular. Varyin9 degrees of heart block and coiiapse set in, and death occurS from peripheral circulatory fcilure. Tetanic eonvuisions are sometimes obser'/ed. ^ Dose: - The fatal dose is not certain. One seed kiiled a child, about four years old. Eight to ten seeds wouid prove fatai to an aduit. period: - Fata! period is not certain. A young man died in two or three hours after he tcok his ffieal mixed with the powd«red root. <• Post-mortem Appealsnce: &eneralised haemorrhages and signs of gastrointestinal irritation havs been found. In the case of a Hindu male, who died shorrly after taking some yellow oleander, the mucous coat of the stomach was thrown into exc.qyrated foids, the 9eneral surfaee of which was congested, and of a deep red colour; scattered about the folds, were some inflammatory spots of a lighter eolour than the genera\ surfc.ee, somewhfft glistening and stellate in appearance, sevepai irrz9ular' fragments like millet sseds were found scattered in the mucous roids of the stomach, wh'ich on analysis were found to be those of yellow oleander. The duodenum to the extent of four inches was brick-red in colour and had an irre9ular purple patch in the centre. The liver was congested. 23. Therefors, as per AAodi's Medical Jurisprudencs and Toxicology, powder of the root of yeliow oleander is fatal and if it is mixed in meal, it can cause cieath. As per the evidence of Parmanand (PW-4), he 9ave the rcot of yellow oleander to the accussd persons. Accused Shyam Prasad arter crushin9 the root, made powder of the same which was given to Budhwaria Boi, who ultimately mixed the same in the '.'egetcble served »'iththe meolg to Santram &. Itwari. In the circumstances, for the foregoing reasons, it is estcibjished that the accused persons were in possession ofthe poison i.e, the root of yeilow oleander. 24. A5 for GS the third point is concerned, Anita Bai (PW-5) - wjfe of Sukhram, has stated in her evidence that on the day of incident, she was at her "esidence, at about 12 noon, Sudhwaria Bai cooked meal for al! pesrsons, her husband Sukhrsm was at Bilaspur, Page 10 of 13 '-, whereas, Santrairi & Itwari had gone for their work. Budhwaria Sai first servea' ^.. ve9etable of potato & Jhurga. Itwcri ste the vegetable, half an hour thereafter, Santram came and Budhwaria Bai ssrved the some ve9etab!e in the same utensil +o Santram, hs also ate that ve9etable. Thereafter, Itwari sturted vomiting and Sarri'r'om also stcrted vomiting. They lie down on t'he cot. She (PW-5) called the docto". The doctor advised to take them to the Kota hospitai. Budhwarie Bai cleaned the vomiting substance of Santram & Itwari, however the seeond vomitin9 substance of Santram & Itwan was covered by Kotwarin of the viliage. Thereafter, Santrsm & Itwari wsrs taken to Kota for admitting them in the hospital, where they died. She informad he,' husband Sukhrsm and he aiso came. Rernaining ve9etabls, which was in the utensii, ifas seized by' the Police. The second vomiting substance was also seized by the Police. In cross-examination, she has stated that it is ihcorrect to say that Sudhwaric. Bd had not served meais to Sdntram <Si Itwcri. The Poiice people coiiected the vomitin9 substarice of Santram & Itwari from the ecrth afier scratchin9 the earth. 25. Anita Bai (PW-5), who is fami ly mernber ofthe deceased persons & cccused Bucihwaria Bai, has stated in her evidence that aceused Budhwaria Bd cooked meais, she cooked vegetable of potato & JhurQO. and same was served by her to Santram •&. Itwari. Perusal ofthe F.S.L. repor-t Ex.P-28revealsthatthetest ofvoiniting substance ofthe deceased persons as well as of the vegetabie, was positive for yellow oleander'. Therefore, it is established that the accused persons had opportunity to administer poison to the deceased persons. 26.As fcr as the fourth point is concerned, it has been established that accused/ appeiiants Shyom Prasad sSi Budhwaria Bai procured the root ofyeilow oieonder from Pormanand (PW-4), same was crushed by Shyarn Prasad on a stone which was recovsred at the instance of Shyam Prasad by the Investigatin9 Officer, afl-er crushing the sdd root, the powder was yven to Budhworia Bai and she mixed the same in the vegetabie which was served with meals to deceased SantramA Itwari by Budhwaria Bd. 27. As per the evidence of Anita Bai (PW-5), Santram & Itwari, sfter eating their meals, start-ed vomitin9 and lie down on the cot, thereafter, she caited the doctor who advised to take them to Kota hospital, they were taken to Kota and ultimately they died in Kota hospital on aecount of consumption of poison. Vomiting substance as well as remaming vegetabie tvas seized bythe Poiice fromthe house of accused Budhwar'ia Bai and asper the evidence of S.S. Rajput (PW-13) - Investigating Offieer, sarr.s was sent ror Page 11 of 13 ^·~> ^AT chemical examination under Ex.P-26 and the report of F.^.L. Exs.P-27 & P-2'3 were received. As per the report EK.P-28, piecss of root of yellow oleander as also viscera of SontrarR & Itwari preserved by the doetor were examined by the F.S.L. and alithese items were found contcining the yeliow oleander. Vomiting substance cf+he dececsed persons collected by the Investigating Officer was aiso found containing yelloi*' oleander, as per the F.S.L. report Ex.P-28. 28. As per (Vlodi's AAedical Jurisprudence and Toxicoiogy, powder of the root of yellow oleancier is a poisonous substcince and if