Claiming that she clearly knows what impact electrocution has on the body, the woman, arguing before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, stated that she disapproves of the prosecution’s theory of electrocution based on her scientific knowledge.
In a recent incident, a 60-year-old chemistry professor, who is sentenced to 20 years in jail over the charges of killing her husband, has challenged the forensic findings in the autopsy report, media reports said.
Claiming that she clearly knows what impact electrocution has on the body, the woman, arguing before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, stated that she disapproves of the prosecution’s theory of electrocution based on her scientific knowledge.
This was the woman’s reply when the court asked her about her views on the post-mortem findings accusing her of murdering your husband by electrocution.
The convict, Mamta Pathak, arguing her case before the HC bench Justices Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra gave a detailed explanation on how a human body is affected when electric current interacts with tissues. She mentioned that it’s not possible to differentiate between ‘electric and thermal burn marks’ in an autopsy, and it can only be done only through a chemical analysis and not visually.
Pathak’s explanation on the case took the judge by surprise, leading him to find out that she was a chemistry professor. The video of this extraordinary court hearing has been making rounds on the internet.
Mamta Pathak was arrested on the charges of killing her husband, Neeraj Pathak, who was a retired govt doctor, by allegedly giving him electric shocks and giving him sleeping pills, several media reports said.
A TOI report quoting the prosecution said that Mamta’s husband was found dead in his house in Chhatarpur on April 29, 2021.
The report also added that Mamata lived separately from her husband but had returned to him a few months before his death. Though the couple started living together, they often had arguments over the suspicion of Neeraj having an affair.
On the day of the incident, Neeraj had called one of his relatives, stating that he had been tortured, was not given food, and was locked in the bathroom, the publication said.
A recording of their phone conversation was presented in the trial court, the report added. Further quoting the prosecution, the publication said that Neeraj was released by Mamta from the bathroom only when the relative contacted the police and the cops intervened. Neeraj had also suffered head injuries, and on the same night, died around 9 pm.
Authorities also mentioned that sleeping pills were recovered from her husband’s room during the investigation.
Mamta had gone to Jhansi for her dialysis the very next day, however, it could not be done due to the absence of her Covid certificate. She informed the police about her husband’s death after she returned from there at 9 pm.
A session court found her guilty of murder, based on circumstantial evidence and she was sentenced to a life term.
In her argument, Mamta mentioned that the house was safe from any kind of accident due to a short circuit as her husband had got his house insured, adding that there was no expert inspection in the house following her husband’s death.
