BHOPAL/JABALPUR: A 60-year-old chemistry professor from Madhya Pradesh, sentenced to 20 years in prison for the alleged murder of her husband, has contested the findings of the autopsy report, claiming her scientific expertise gives her insight into the physiological effects of electrocution.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently heard her arguments and has reserved its judgment. In the meantime, her sentence has been suspended.
During the hearing, Justice Agarwal asked the professor to confirm her academic background. When she affirmed she was indeed a professor of chemistry, the judge questioned why her defense team had not challenged the autopsy findings more thoroughly during cross-examination in the trial court. Mamta replied, “I was in jail then.” At one point, Justice Agarwal also corrected her when she confused nitric acid with hydrochloric acid during her explanation.
According to the prosecution, Mamta’s husband, Dr. Neeraj Pathak (63), was found dead at his residence in Chhatarpur on April 29, 2021. His body bore electric burn marks at five different spots. Mamta, a chemistry lecturer at a local college, had been living separately from Neeraj but had rejoined him a few months prior to his death. Despite their reconciliation, the couple reportedly continued to have frequent arguments, primarily due to Mamta’s suspicion of an alleged affair.
On the day of the incident, Neeraj reportedly called a relative, alleging that Mamta had been “torturing” him for the past few days — withholding food and locking him in the bathroom. He also claimed to have suffered head injuries when Mamta allegedly forced him into the bathroom. The relative contacted the police, after which Neeraj was released from confinement. Later that day, the relative checked on Neeraj again via phone. A recording of that conversation was submitted as evidence during the trial.
That night, around 9 p.m., Neeraj was found dead. Mamta claimed she had gone to ask him for food when she discovered he had no pulse. The following day, she traveled to Jhansi for dialysis but was denied treatment due to the absence of a Covid-19 certificate. She returned home around 9 p.m. and informed the police of her husband’s death only then, according to investigators.
Police also reported discovering sleeping pills in Neeraj’s room. Based on circumstantial evidence, the trial court convicted Mamta and sentenced her to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment.
In her defense, Mamta argued that Neeraj had insured the house, and it was safeguarded against incidents like electrical short circuits or leaks. She also pointed out that no forensic expert had inspected the house after his death. Additionally, she questioned the credibility of the autopsy, noting that the postmortem was performed 36 hours after death — a time by which decomposition typically begins. However, the autopsy report made no mention of any foul odor, which she claimed was a significant omission.
The bench assured Mamta that her appeal was being heard “out of turn” and with an “open mind,” but emphasized that all decisions must be based on the “touchstone of evidence.” The court has reserved its verdict.
