Considering that both Anshu and Bipasha are not aware of the biochip

implanted in their brain, they both try to poison Charu. They believe that
the white substance is Arsenic and were in full control of the action they
were performing i.e. mixing Arsenic in Charu's tea. They were well aware
of the fact that it would kill Charu and they were not in a position where
they had no option left but to poison Charu. Hence, they both should be
equally evaluated morally and placed on the same page. It would be
tempting to say that Anshu's substance was sugar while Bipasha's Arsenic
and therefore Bipasha is more blameworthy than Anshu but it is not
correct. It may be intuitive to blame Bipasha more than Anshu since Charu
died because of Bipasha's mixing and not Anshu's. Had Bipasha not mixed
the white substance in Charu's tea, Charu would still be alive since
Anshu's action was just mixing sugar. However, this justification is
incomplete and incorrect. We need to analyse the situation from a
different perspective considering other aspects of the situation. Although
it is true that Charu was poisoned because of Bipasha but it was mere luck
that Anshu's substance turned out to be sugar. The main argument is that
lack of awareness about the nature of substance that make the
activity(mixing it in tea) wrong is immaterial in determining their
culpability. The real nature of substance was not in control of either of
them since it was the chemist who always lied and sold sugar as Arsenic.
In this scenario, we know about the agents that they deliberately tried to
kill Charu but because of luck Charu died due to Bipasha's action and not
Anshu's. The consequences of both of them mixing the white
substance(which they both believed to be Arsenic) are different, however
since they were already morally aware about the consequences, they both
are equally culpable. According to the control principle, two people should
not be morally assessed differently if the only difference in their situation
is actions which are beyond their control. In current situation, the only
difference is the white substance which was given to them by the lying
chemist and hence beyond their control. The temptation to blame Bipasha
more than Anshu is simply unjustified due to the above principle. The
thought of attributing responsibility of Charu's murder to Bipasha more
than Anshu is morally incorrect as both of them despite knowing that
arsenic would kill Charu (here 'knowing' means they believed what
chemist said to due the psychological impairment caused by the chip)
tried to kill her. The mere accidental fact that Anshu's substance was
sugar does not provide a firm ground on basis of which Anshu should be
blamed less than Bipasha.

We analyse if both of them fulfill the epistemic conditions to attribute

them the responsibility of Charu's murder. The first requirement of
awareness of action is satisfied by both of them. They also know that on
drinking the tea, Charu will die of arsenic poisoning. If they were not
aware of the substance they are mixing, then it would make sense to not
blame either of them. Since both of them believed that the substance they
are mixing in tea is Arsenic and that Charu is going to drink that tea, they
can be treated as blameworthy. We assume that the second requirement of
awareness of moral belief is also satisfied by them as any person would
naturally know that killing a person without any reason is morally wrong.
This would be the case in any usual situation except some extraordinary
situations (for eg. if any of Anshu or Bipasha had been grown up in a cruel
environment where killing people was common and not something of
great significance). Thirdly, They also know that the consequence of their
action(mixing arsenic in tea) will kill Charu. And lastly, there wasn't any
compulsion for them to kill Charu. There is no mention or indication in the
question that they were forced or threatened for their lives by someone to
kill Charu. So, we can safely assume that they weren't under any
compulsion or pressure to kill Charu. Therefore, both of them satisfy all
the epistemic conditions of responsibility and should be equally attributed
the responsibility of Charu's murder. Both Anshu and Charu are the 'type
of person' who would try to kill Charu and it was just luck that Anshu's
substance turned out to be sugar. Their intentions were same, their
actions were same, both of them knew the consequences of their actions,
both of them knew it was morally incorrect to murder someone, both of
them were under similar circumstances and therefore an unbiased view
would be to blame Anshu as much as one would blame Bipasha.