“Are you a chemistry professor?” the judge inquired.
“Yes,” Mamta Pathak responded, offering a respectful namaste.
Dressed in a white sari, with glasses perched on her nose, the retired college instructor stood before two judges in a Madhya Pradesh courtroom, articulating her points with the precision of a forensic chemistry lecture.
“In the post-mortem,” she contended, her voice composed despite a slight tremor, “distinguishing between a thermal burn and an electric burn mark necessitates thorough chemical analysis.”
Justice Vivek Agarwal interjected, “The doctor who performed the post-mortem identified clear signs of electrocution.”
The moment was unusual, almost surreal – a 63-year-old woman, accused of her husband’s murder by electrocution, explaining the role of acids and tissue reactions in determining the nature of a burn.
The exchange, captured on video during her April hearing, circulated widely in India, captivating the internet. However, in the courtroom, her confident, expert-like testimony could not overcome the prosecution’s case: a murdered spouse and a motive driven by suspicion and marital strife.
Last month, the High Court upheld Mamta Pathak’s life sentence, dismissing her appeal in the April 2021 murder of her husband, Neeraj Pathak, a retired physician.
While Pathak presented a vigorous self-defense – pointing to inconsistencies in the autopsy, the house’s insulation, and electrochemical theory – the court deemed the circumstantial evidence conclusive: she had drugged her husband with sleeping pills before electrocuting him.
In court, Mamta, a mother of two, meticulously reviewed overflowing case files, becoming increasingly animated as she presented her arguments.
“Sir, electric burn marks cannot be definitively classified as ante-mortem [before death] or post-mortem [after death],” she asserted, quoting from a forensics textbook.
“How did the doctors determine it was an electric burn mark in the post-mortem report?”
Experts say microscopic examination cannot reliably distinguish between electrical burns occurring before and after death, making standard examinations inconclusive. According to one study, a detailed analysis of dermal changes may indicate whether a burn occurred ante- or post-mortem.
An impromptu discussion on chemical reactions ensued, with the judge questioning her about laboratory procedures. Mamta described various acids, explaining that electron microscopy, unavailable in a post-mortem setting, was necessary for differentiation. She attempted to explain electron microscopy and the properties of different acids. Three female lawyers observed with subtle smiles.
Mamta continued, stating that she had been studying law in prison for a year. Referencing her tabbed files with stickers and forensic medicine texts, she highlighted alleged flaws in the investigation – from the unexamined crime scene to the absence of qualified electrical and forensic experts.
“Our house was insured from 2017 to 2022, and inspections confirmed protection against electrical fire,” she stated.
Mamta informed the court that her husband suffered from high blood pressure and heart disease. She suggested the actual cause of death was the narrowing and “calcification of his coronary arteries due to old age.” She further proposed he may have slipped and sustained a hematoma, but a CT scan was not performed to confirm this.
Neeraj Pathak, 65, was found dead at the family home on April 29, 2021. The autopsy report cited electrocution as the cause of death. Mamta was arrested and charged with murder days later.
Police seized an 11-meter electric wire with a two-pin plug and CCTV footage from the couple’s residence. Six sleeping pill tablets were recovered from a strip of ten.
The post-mortem report attributed the cause of death to cardiorespiratory shock resulting from electrical current at multiple sites, occurring 36 to 72 hours before the autopsy conducted on May 1.
“But my fingerprints were not found on the strip of tablets,” Mamta told the judges.
Ultimately, her arguments proved unconvincing to Judges Agarwal and Devnarayan Sinha.
For nearly four decades, Mamta and Neeraj Pathak had lived a seemingly conventional middle-class life in Chhatarpur – a drought-prone district in Madhya Pradesh known for its agriculture, granite quarries, and small businesses.
She taught chemistry at the local government college; he served as the chief medical officer at the district hospital. They raised two sons – one living abroad, the other residing with his mother. Neeraj retired voluntarily in 2019 after 39 years as a government doctor and subsequently opened a private clinic at home.
The incident occurred during the pandemic. Neeraj displayed Covid symptoms and remained on the first floor, while Mamta and her son, Nitish, stayed downstairs. Two staircases connected Neeraj’s rooms to the open gallery and waiting area of his private clinic, where several staff members worked between the lab and the medical store.
The 97-page judgment stated that Mamta reported finding her husband unresponsive in bed on April 29 but did not inform a doctor or the police until May 1. She took her elder son to Jhansi – over 130km away – without a clear reason, according to the driver, returning the same evening. She claimed ignorance of the cause of his death when she finally alerted the police.
Beneath the surface lay a troubled marriage. The judges emphasized long-standing marital discord, with the couple living separately and Mamta suspecting her husband of infidelity.
On the morning of his death, Neeraj contacted an associate, alleging that Mamta was “torturing him,” locking him in a bathroom, withholding food for days, and causing physical injuries. He also accused her of taking cash, ATM cards, vehicle keys, and bank fixed deposit documents. His son contacted a friend who alerted the police, who rescued the retired doctor from what was described as “Mamta’s custody.”
The couple had lived apart recently, reinforcing the court’s skepticism.
Mamta told the court she was the “best mother,” presenting a birthday card from her children as proof. She displayed photos of herself feeding her husband and family snapshots.
However, the judges remained unconvinced, asserting that such displays of affection did not negate motive; a “doting mother” could also be a “suspicious wife.”
Fifty minutes into her deposition, after fielding questions and defending herself against the court’s doubts, Mamta’s composure wavered for the first time.
“I know one thing… I did not kill him,” she said, her voice fading.
At another point, she confessed, “I can’t take this very much more.”
Attempting to ease the tension, Judge Agarwal remarked, “You must be accustomed to this… you must be lecturing for 50 minutes in college.”
“Forty minutes, sir. But they are small children,” Mamta replied.
“Small children in college? But your designation is assistant professor,” the judge pressed.
“But they are kids, sir,” she responded.
“Don’t tell us such stories,” Judge Agarwal interrupted sharply.
Mamta fought not only as a defendant but as a teacher transforming the courtroom into a chemistry lab – attempting to prove her innocence through science. Ultimately, the cold facts proved more compelling than her lessons.
The free trade deal signed last month will open India’s vast government procurement market to UK suppliers – but it will not be easy.
Rescue operations at the disaster site have been hampered by heavy rains and blocked roads.
Many fear they could lose the long-standing support that sustained the community after the current Dalai Lama passes away.
India tackles the problem of making AI translate between its many languages and dialects
Activists say it will be difficult to move over a million stray dogs to shelters within eight weeks.