A murder and a viral video: Who is Mamta Pathak, former chemistry professor, convicted of killing her husband by electrocution

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.

In the video, Mamta begins her defence by stating that it is “not possible to differentiate between thermal and electric burn marks during a post-mortem (by simply looking at them)”. The convict then proceeded to explain that a burn mark found on a body needs to be removed and treated with chemicals to ascertain its source.

“Are you a chemistry professor?” the judge asks.

Replying in the affirmative, Mamta adds, “I don’t know how the post-mortem has said this is an electric burn mark.”

On April 29, 2021, Dr Pathak was found dead in his Loknathpuram house in Madhya Pradesh’s Chhatarpur town. The cause of death, according to the autopsy, was electrocution. Within days, his wife 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 (IPC).

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, going to Jhansi, over 100 km from Chhatarpur town, for dialysis, and admitting to her driver that she had made a “big mistake”, according to court documents — was also deemed suspicious.

The clinching evidence was provided by her husband’s relative, the star witness, who testified that Dr Pathak had called him hours before his death and said, “Mamta is harassing me… she has locked me in the bathroom and hasn’t given me food or water.”

The district court had found the timeline, witness testimonies, and the recovery of a plug-in wire and sleeping pills from Mamta’s residence sufficient to convict her. In his June 26, 2022, verdict, Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh Kumar Devaliya had convicted her to life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 10,000.

Mamta, however, filed an appeal for suspension of sentence before the High Court’s Jabalpur Bench, which started hearing her plea from July 19, 2022, onwards. During the first two hearings — on September 6, 2022, and November 28, 2022 — her counsels failed to appear before the court. On January 17, 2023, her counsel appeared for the first time and sought an expedited hearing, citing her age and her responsibilities toward her aged mother. The Bench, then comprising Justices Sujoy Paul and Amar Nath Kesharwani, dismissed her plea, citing the “gruesome nature” of the crime.

On April 16, 2023, Mamta refused legal aid and told the court that she had studied the case for 18 months. She filed another interim application in August, reiterating her desire to self-represent. Rejecting her plea, the court on August 31, 2023, said “no occasion arises” to permit self-representation at that stage.

The turning point came on March 12, 2024, when Mamta presented her own arguments for the first time. The next day, on March 13, she focused on two pleas: suspension of sentence and bail. She argued that the prosecution’s case rested solely on circumstantial evidence linking her to her husband’s death. There was no direct evidence or eyewitnesses, she told the court, adding that forensic evidence could not prove intent.

The former professor also submitted extensive medical records citing her health issues — heart valve disease, kidney dysfunction and suspected bone cancer — and highlighted that she was the sole caregiver for her mentally and physically ill son. Acknowledging the gravity of her ailments and responsibilities, the court granted temporary suspension of sentence and bail for six months.

On August 29, 2024, Mamta returned to court to seek an extension. Once again, she chose to self-represent. She informed the court that her treatment had been delayed due to financial hardship and that her son, diagnosed with schizophrenia, was entirely dependent on her. The court extended her bail.

On April 16, 2025, Mamta addressed the court once more, during which she confirmed declining the legal aid she had been offered. This time, the Bench observed that she had chosen self-representation consciously and noted it on record. Her arguments, once again, remained inconclusive. The next day, on April 17, she told the court that she wished to be assisted by her former counsel, senior advocate Surendra Singh, to complete the remaining submissions. The judgement in the case is reserved, her legal team says.