Latest news with #MamtaPathak
Time of India
31-07-2025
- Time of India
Madhya Pradesh HC upholds ex-chemistry professor's life sentence for husband murder
BHOPAL/JABALPUR: The Madhya Pradesh high court has upheld the life sentence awarded to a former chemistry professor from Chhatarpur district for killing her husband by electrocution, turning down her appeal against a sessions court order. A video of court proceedings during hearing of her appeal by a division bench of MP high court had gone viral in April in which she was arguing her own case and trying to drive home her contention that thermal and burn marks can't be differentiated in post mortem and it can only be done through chemical analysis, therefore the post mortem report of her husband that he died due to electrocution was not reliable. When one of the judges asks her during her arguments 'If she is a professor of chemistry', she nods and says 'Yes'. Following hearing her arguments on April 28, 2025, the court had suspended her sentence while reserving its judgement. But in the final judgement, the judges vacated the suspension of sentence and asked professor Mamta Pathak to surrender in the trial court to undergo the remainder of her sentence. The court, while upholding the trial court order, said that looking at the chain of events on the day of the incident in 2021, it's clear that nobody visited the couple and it was Mamta who administered some intoxicant to her husband Dr Neeraj Pathak and electrocuted him when he was unconscious. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo 60-year-old Mamta Pathak was charged with killing her husband Dr Neeraj Pathak, 65, a doctor posted at civil hospital Chhatarpur on April 29, 2021 after administering him sleeping pills and electrocuting him when he was unconscious at their residence in Chhatarpur. Burn marks were found on the body of the slain doctor at five places. Mamta, a professor of chemistry, lived away from her husband due to marital discord but they were living together for some months. She suspected her husband to have an extramarital relationship. Though Mamta challenged the findings of the postmortem report during her arguments very much like a chemistry professor, there was other strong evidence against her too. On the day of the incident, her husband had made a phone call to one of his friends to tell him that his wife has been harassing her for the last 2-3 days and has shut him in a bathroom. He sustained injuries when he resisted her attempts to put him in the bathroom. He further asked him to contact police to get him free. The friend in question contacted SHO, Civil Lines police station, Chhatarpur and the doctor was freed. Recording of the conversation between the doctor and his friend was produced in the court by the latter. The doctor died at 9pm on April 29, 2021. She knew about it but she went for dialysis to a hospital in Jhansi with her son and driver of her car the next day. The dialysis was refused as she didn't have Covid certificate and they returned the same night and only on May 1, she informed the police about the death of her husband two days after.
Indian Express
30-07-2025
- Indian Express
Chemistry professor accused of electrocuting husband argued her own case in court. Her arguments quickly unravelled
Mamta Pathak, a former chemistry professor who argued her own appeal in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, will have to undergo a life sentence as the court upheld her conviction on Tuesday. Pathak was convicted for the murder of her husband, Neeraj Pathak, 63, a senior physician at the Chhatarpur District Hospital, in 2021. He was found dead on April 29, 2021, in his Loknathpuram house in Madhya Pradesh's Chhatarpur town. The cause of death, according to the autopsy, was electrocution. Within days, Mamta, a professor at a local government college, was arrested for his murder and charged under Section 302 (punishment for murder) of the Indian Penal Code. The trial, conducted at the Chhatarpur district court, was based on circumstantial evidence, including marital discord over Mamta's belief that her husband was having an affair. Besides this, her behaviour the day after his death — leaving the house with her son in the morning without informing anyone about her dead husband and going to Jhansi, over 100 km away, for dialysis, according to court documents — was deemed suspicious. Mamta had argued her own case before the High Court and stated that there were several lapses in the postmortem report. She argued that she could not have electrocuted her husband as the house was wholly insulated and there was no possibility of completion of the circuit, so the cause of death had to be cardiac arrest. A bench of Justices Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra, in their 97-page judgement, rejected her plea as investigating officer Jagatpal Singh told the court that he had seized a two-pin plug wire. 'It is evident that firstly, earthing is possible only through a three-pin plug wire where three internal cords of the electric wire are connected to positive, negative and earthing. In a two-pin point plug, there is no aspect of earthing,' the court said. Thus, the aforesaid part of the evidence clearly reveals that firstly, the 'theory of functioning of RCCB and the house being completely insulated is not made out… Secondly, the RCCB (residual current circuit breaker) can be manipulated, and thirdly, there is medico-legal evidence of exit wound of electric current, which shows that earthing had taken place.' Mamta flagged the lack of 'chemical examination and electron microscopy to find out the deposition of metals on the skin and tissue', while making her point on insufficient evidence for electric burns. The court perused the testimonies of two doctors who conducted the postmortem examination to reject her plea. 'No suggestion was given to Dr Mukul Sahu that in the absence of scanning of skin through electron microscopy, it is not possible to say that the burns were caused due to electric current. Even Dr D S Badkur, former director of Medico Legal Institute, did not say that without electron microscopy, finding of electric burns cannot be given,' the court opined. Rejecting the prosecution's argument of marital discord, Mamta had argued that she was a good mother for her children and produced a greeting card sent by her children on her birthday. The court said this was 'not a sufficient circumstance to take away the motive because a person may be a 'doting mother but may also be a suspecting wife' at the same time.' 'Unless any evidence is brought on record to show that there was not only an element of cordiality but the relationship between husband and wife was of great faith and understanding, and merely on suggestion of the appellant, the motive cannot be removed from the acts of the appellant,' the court said. A photograph showing Mamta feeding Dr Neeraj Pathak or showing her in his company 'clearly reveals that none of them are of the recent past,' the court said. Mamta had alleged that her signatures were taken by the police under pressure. But she also 'admits that she is literate and is working as Assistant Professor of Chemistry', the court observed. 'Merely saying that her signatures were obtained under pressure and explaining that her signatures were obtained after seven days of recording of the inquest are two different things and she has very cleverly tried to cover up by saying that the admission, which has already come on record in the form of signatures on inquest, were obtained under duress after seven days. There is no material to support the aforesaid contention and, therefore, it needs to and is hereby rejected,' the court said. On the defence contention on the delay in filing an FIR and Mamta's name not featuring in it, the court said, 'The FIR is neither ante-dated nor ante-timed, it is based on Merg Intimation, which is not accused of being manipulated. ' 'Much noise without any substance cannot be made so as to frustrate the investigation and the consequential proceedings,' the court observed. The court had also perused medical reports to state that the defence claim that Dr Pathak was suffering from Covid and was hence in isolation was denied. The court said, 'Covid antigen report of Dr Neeraj Pathak was negative. It leaves no iota of doubt that he was apparently not suffering from Covid and was in fact under a forceful isolation…,' the judgement read.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
30-07-2025
- First Post
Ex-chemistry prof who used science to defend herself after husband's murder gets life term: Who is Mamta Pathak?
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld the conviction of Mamta Pathak, 65, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for killing her husband, Dr Neeraj Pathak. The former chemistry professor's video went viral in May, in which she was seen presenting her own arguments before the court and questioning her husband's post-mortem report. But why did she murder him? read more A former chemistry professor's life sentence for killing her husband has been upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Mamta Pathak, a 65-year-old woman, was convicted in 2022 for the murder of her husband by electrocution. The division bench of Justices Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra dismissed her appeal, ruling that she killed her husband, Neeraj Pathak, a retired government doctor. The case had grabbed attention after a video of Mamta Pathak arguing for herself in the courtroom went viral online. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Let's take a closer look. What's the case? On April 29, 2021, Dr Neeraj Pathak was found dead at his Loknathpuram house in Madhya Pradesh's Chhatarpur. The autopsy found that the cause of his demise was electrocution. Police grew suspicious about Mamta due to her behaviour on the day of Dr Neeraj's death. She had left with her son in the morning for Jhansi for dialysis, without informing anyone about her husband's demise. The woman also told her driver that she had made a 'big mistake', Indian Express reported, citing court documents. Mamta, a professor at a local government college, was arrested within days for murder and booked under Section 302 (punishment for murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial was held at the Chhatarpur district court. Dr Neeraj's relative told the court that the doctor had called him hours before his death, saying: 'Mamta is harassing me… she has locked me in the bathroom and hasn't given me food or water.' On June 26, 2022, the district court found Mamta guilty of her husband's murder based on witness testimonies and the recovery of a plug-in wire and sleeping pills at her residence, the newspaper reported. Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh Kumar Devaliya convicted her to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 10,000. Mamta filed an appeal seeking suspension of sentence before the High Court's Jabalpur Bench. How Mamta Pathak defended herself before HC On March 12, 2024, Mamta presented her arguments before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The former professor argued that the prosecution's case was based on circumstantial evidence linking her to her husband's death, pointing out that there was no direct evidence or eyewitnesses. Seeking suspension of sentence and bail, she furnished medical records to highlight her health issues, including suspected bone cancer. Mamta also told the high court that she was the sole caregiver for her mentally and physically ill son. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The court then temporarily suspended her sentence, granting her bail for six months. Her bail was extended again in August last year. Her video challenging the post-mortem report during a hearing went viral in May this year. The clip showed Justice Vivek Agrawal asking Mamta at the time, 'The allegations against you are that you murdered your husband through electrocution. The post-mortem doctor has categorically said there were signs of electric shock.' Mamta told the court that it is 'not possible to differentiate between thermal and electric burn marks during a post-mortem'. She went on to explain that only a proper chemical analysis could determine the source. 'Are you a chemistry professor?' the judge asked. To which, she replied: 'Yes'. The judge didn't see it coming. — Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) May 27, 2025 STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Mamta added, 'I don't know how the post-mortem has said this is an electric burn mark.' ALSO READ: Meghalaya honeymoon case: How Sonam, her boyfriend plotted and planned Raja Raghuvanshi's murder HC upholds Mamta Pathak's life term The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Tuesday (July 29) upheld the former chemistry professor's conviction in the murder case of her husband. The bench ruled that Mamta was not on good terms with Dr Neeraj. It found she tortured him to death by giving him an antipsychotic drug and then an electric shock, as per a Bar and Bench report. The court asked her to immediately surrender before the trial court. It also dismissed her submission that her husband died from a cardiovascular disease. The bench also rejected her claim that she was falsely implicated by her husband's relatives, who were after his property. The court said that the couple's sons are Class-I heirs to Dr Neeraj's property. The motive for the murder, the court found, was marital discord with Mamta suspecting her husband of having an affair. With inputs from agencies
Hindustan Times
29-05-2025
- Hindustan Times
‘Are you a chemistry professor?': 60-year-old woman accused of husband's murder stuns judge with scientific talk
A viral video on social media shows a 60-year-old woman explaining the difference between types of burn marks to a Madhya Pradesh High Court judge, who informed her that a post-mortem report proved death by electrocution. Refuting the report, the retired teacher offered a comprehensive explanation, prompting the judge to ask if she was a professor; she replied that she used to be a chemistry professor. Mamta Pathak was representing herself in court in April after she was accused of murdering her husband, Neeraj Pathak, by electrocuting him in 2021. Pathak was found guilty of murder and sentenced to a life term in 2022, but she approached the High Court with an appeal. A short clip of her defending herself in court recently has surprised many on social media. "You are accused of murdering your husband by electrocution. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem said that the body had clear signs of being electrocuted," Madhya Pradesh High Court Justice Vivek Agarwal tells the former teacher in the clip, recorded in April this year. Dressed in all white, the professor rejects the finding and boldly claims that the determination of such burn marks was not possible. She delivers a brief lesson on how electricity and tissue interact and explains how acids are used to analyse whether the burns are thermal or electrical. She dismisses the claim that a determination of electrocution can be made just visually. The answer surprised the judge, who stopped her halfway to confirm that she was a chemistry professor. Surprised by her explanation, he nodded to a lawyer seated behind her, who reciprocated his reaction. Pathak presented her case in front of the division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Devnarayan Mishra. After the last hearing, the Bench reserved judgment while the professor remained on bail. The Madhya Pradesh police had arrested Mamta Pathak for killing her husband, 63-year-old Neeraj Pathak, a retired government doctor 63, by giving him sleeping pills and allegedly inflicting electric shocks on him. She had then left Jhansi and claimed that she had found her husband dead when she returned. However, the police found audio of Neeraj Pathak, which went viral on social media, claiming his wife tortured him. 'Mamta came to know that Neeraj Pathak was in a relationship with another woman. Mamta had also filed a complaint with the police in January 2021 that her husband used to give her sedative pills by mixing them in food so that he could meet another woman. However, she withdrew the complaint later,' the police had said in the chargesheet. A sessions court had found her guilty of murder and sentenced her to a life term. She then approached the High Court to appeal the decision and got bail last year. (Also read: Who is Jonas Masetti, Brazilian Vedic teacher walked barefoot to receive Padma Shri)
