The LLB Guide

Breakdown of the 97-Page Judgment: Mamta Pathak v. State of Madhya Pradesh (MP High Court, July 2025)

The Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench: Justices Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra) delivered a detailed 97-page judgment on July 29/30, 2025 (Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-JBP:34674), upholding the life imprisonment sentence of Mamta Pathak for murdering her husband, Dr. Neeraj Pathak, under Section 302 IPC. The court dismissed her criminal appeal against the 2022 trial court conviction.

While the full text is not publicly available in open sources, reports from legal sites (e.g., Verdictum, Bar & Bench) and news outlets provide a clear structured breakdown.

1. Case Background & Facts Established
• Dr. Neeraj Pathak (retired doctor, aged ~65) died on April 29, 2021, at home in Chhatarpur.
• Initial report: Accidental electrocution.
• Investigation revealed murder: Mamta administered intoxicants/sedatives (Olanzapine tablets detected in viscera), then electrocuted him while unconscious.

• Strained marriage: Mamta suspected infidelity; she tortured him mentally/physically.
• Key incident: Hours before death, Dr. Neeraj called a relative, saying Mamta locked him in bathroom, denied food, caused head injury → Police rescued him; audio recording and testimony used as evidence.

• No outsiders entered the house that day.
• Recovery of electric wire at Mamta’s instance; empty Olanzapine strip.

2. Motive
• Marital discord and cruelty due to suspected extramarital affair.

• Mamta lived separately earlier but returned ~10 months before incident.

• Court rejected claims of false implication for property (sons are Class-I heirs).

3. Circumstantial Evidence Chain
• Court emphasized complete, unbroken chain proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

• Key links:
• Last seen together; no trespass.
• Sedative administration (viscera report).
• Electrocution evidence (entry/exit wounds, medico-legal proof).
• Prior torture (phone call, injuries).
• Recoveries and conduct post-incident (delayed reporting to police/doctor).
• No alternative hypothesis possible.

4. Appellant’s (Mamta Pathak’s) Arguments & Rejections
• Represented herself initially (viral video: Argued as chemistry expert that electric vs. thermal burns indistinguishable without chemical analysis/electron microscope).
• Challenged post-mortem: Inconsistencies, decomposition factors ignored.
• Claimed accidental death or Covid isolation.
• Alleged manipulated FIR, false implication.
• Court’s Response:
• Scientific defense insufficient to break evidence chain.
• Post-mortem valid; exit wounds confirm electrocution (earthing occurred; RCCB manipulable).
• Photos of happy couple old/irrelevant.
• Delay in FIR explained (based on merg intimation, not manipulated).
• No lapses in investigation/trial.

5. Legal Principles Applied
• Relied on Supreme Court precedents for circumstantial evidence (complete chain required; no reasonable doubt).
• Crime grave, cold-blooded, premeditated.
• Upheld trial court judgment (Sessions Trial No. 84/2021, dated June 29, 2022).

6. Final Directions
• Appeal dismissed.
• Life sentence confirmed.
• Temporary bail/suspension vacated.
• Mamta directed to surrender immediately to serve remaining sentence.

This judgment reinforces strict standards for circumstantial evidence in murder cases and rejects technical defenses when overall proof is overwhelming. The case highlights rare self-representation but prioritizes evidence over courtroom theatrics.

For the full judgment, check official MP High Court website or legal databases like CaseMine/Indian Kanoon (may require subscription).

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4 5

40 minutes ago | [YT] | 1

The LLB Guide

Allahabad HC Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost on Advocate-Petitioner for “Cursory” Drafting & Re-Litigating Settled Issue

In a stern order dated January 2026, Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery of the Allahabad High Court dismissed a writ petition (WRIT-A No. 19508/2025) filed by advocate Abhishek Malaviya (appearing in person) and imposed ₹1 lakh costs. The Court criticized the “cursory” and “layman-like” drafting (e.g., phrases like “prayer starts from here”, improper array of parties) despite defects being pointed out earlier. The petition against Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Commissioner was also barred as the issue was already settled against the petitioner by a Division Bench order dated January 16, 2025 (Writ-A No. 341/2025). The petitioner undertook to deposit the cost the same day.

#AllahabadHC1LakhCost #AdvocatePetitionerCost #CursoryDraftingWrit #ReLitigatingHC #JusticeShamshery2026 #AbhishekMalaviyaCase #KendriyaVidyalayaWrit #AllahabadHCAdvocateCriticism #PrayerStartsHerePetition #ImproperArrayParties #DivisionBenchSettled #WRITA195082025 #NeutralCitation2026AHC2503 #AdvocateInPersonCost #AllahabadHCDraftingStandards #ProfessionalMisconductDrafting #CostDepositUndertaking #RegistrarGeneralCost #AllahabadHCJanuary2026 #WritDefectsNotCured

Skip the Carousel

1 2

3 hours ago | [YT] | 1

The LLB Guide

Delhi HC Directs Advocates Awaiting AIBE Results to Approach Special Committee for BCD Electoral Roll Inclusion

In a recent judgment (January 8, 2026), the Delhi High Court (Justice Amit Bansal) disposed of a writ petition by provisionally enrolled advocates (Umesh Kumar & Ors.) seeking inclusion in the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) electoral rolls. Their names were excluded due to pending AIBE-XX results (declared January 7, 2026). Relying on Supreme Court directions in M. Varadhan case (Nov 2025), the Court directed petitioners to submit representation to the Special Committee by January 9, with decision due by January 12, ahead of final electoral roll publication on January 17, 2026. Individual grievances must go to the Committee; no court intervention allowed.

#DelhiHCAIBEElectoralRoll
#BCDSpecialCommittee2026
#AIBEXXResultsJanuary2026
#BarCouncilDelhiVoterList
#ProvisionalAdvocatesBCDElections
#UmeshKumarDelhiHCCase
#SupremeCourtBarCouncilElections
#AIBEPendingResultsEnrollment
#DelhiHighCourtJanuary2026Judgment
#BCDFinalElectoralRollJanuary17
#SpecialCommitteeDecisionJanuary12
#AdvocatesGrievanceBarCouncil
#MVaradhanSupremeCourtOrder
#JusticeAmitBansalBCD
#AIBEVerificationWhatsApp
#BarCouncilIndiaElectionsTimeline
#DelhiAdvocatesElectoralDispute
#ProvisionalEnrollmentAIBE
#BCDElectionsSupremeCourtMandate
#DelhiHCBarCouncilPetition

Skip the Carousel

1 2

4 hours ago | [YT] | 1

The LLB Guide

Thalapathy Villain Mass Anthem | O-M Annihilation Hindi Song | Powerful Intro Fan Edit 2026
https://youtu.be/bYAGOD6YdcI

1 day ago | [YT] | 1

The LLB Guide

No More Court Trials for Pharma Firms in Minor Drug Law Violations: New CDSCO Guidelines Allow Compounding with Fines

As of January 5, 2026, the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) under the Ministry of Health has introduced amended guidelines allowing pharmaceutical and medical device companies to settle certain minor and technical violations under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, through monetary penalties and self-corrective actions instead of facing criminal prosecution and lengthy court trials. This compounding mechanism, enabled under the Jan Vishwas Act framework, applies to non-serious contraventions (e.g., minor labeling errors or documentation lapses) and aims to reduce judicial burden, ease business operations, and promote compliance without decriminalizing serious offences like substandard or adulterated drugs. Companies can apply for compounding, subject to approval by authorities.


#NoMoreCourtTrialsPharma #CDSCOMinorViolations #PharmaPayFines #JanVishwasActImpact #DrugsActCompounding #PharmaMinorOffences #CDSCOGuidelines #PharmaRegulations2026 #MinorViolationsSettlement #PharmaCriminalProsecution #IndiaPharmaNews #DrugLawFines #PharmaEaseOfBusiness #CDSCOAmendments #MedicalDeviceCompounding #PharmaDocumentationLapses #LabellingErrorsPharma #HealthMinistryIndiaPharma #PharmaContraventions #IndiaDrugRegulations2026

2 days ago | [YT] | 3

The LLB Guide

Karthigai Deepam Row: Madras HC Upholds Order to Light Lamp at Thiruparankundram ‘Deepathoon’, Calls Law & Order Fears ‘Imaginary Ghost’

On January 6, 2026, a division bench of the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) upheld a single judge’s order allowing the Arulmigu Subramania Swamy Temple authorities to light the traditional Karthigai Deepam at the ancient stone pillar (‘Deepathoon’) atop Thiruparankundram hill in Madurai, near a dargah. The court rejected the Tamil Nadu government’s and Waqf Board’s appeals, dismissing law and order concerns as an “imaginary ghost created conveniently” with no real evidence of risk. It affirmed lighting lamps on elevated spots as a recognized Hindu religious practice, directed temple management to facilitate it, and criticized delays. This resolves the controversy that arose after the single judge’s December 2025 order faced non-compliance amid communal sensitivity claims.

#KarthigaiDeepamMadrasHC #ThiruparankundramVerdict #DeepathoonOrder #KarthigaiDeepamHilltop #ImaginaryGhostLawOrder #ThiruparankundramDargah #SubramaniaSwamyDeepam #MaduraiKarthigaiDeepam #MadrasHCDeepam #TamilNaduDeepamRow #DeepathoonStonePillar #KarthigaiDeepamPermission #ThiruparankundramLamp #MaduraiDeepam2026 #DMKDeepamControversy #WaqfBoardThiruparankundram #HinduFestivalHilltop #MadrasHCSlamsTN #DeepamRowResolved #MaduraiTempleNews

2 days ago | [YT] | 2

The LLB Guide

Justice Surya Kant

2 months ago | [YT] | 9

The LLB Guide

🇮🇳 भारत के अगले मुख्य न्यायाधीश कौन होंगे?

🧑‍⚖️ जस्टिस सूर्यकांत बन सकते हैं भारत के अगले मुख्य न्यायाधीश (CJI)!
मुख्य न्यायाधीश बी.आर. गवई ने केंद्र सरकार को उनके नाम की औपचारिक सिफारिश कर दी है।

📅 पदभार ग्रहण की तारीख: 24 नवम्बर 2025
🕰️ कार्यकाल: 9 फरवरी 2027 तक

🌟 जस्टिस सूर्यकांत के बारे में कुछ खास बातें:
✅ हरियाणा के हिसार ज़िले से हैं
✅ सुप्रीम कोर्ट में जज के रूप में 2019 में नियुक्त हुए
✅ संविधान, पर्यावरण और स्वतंत्र अभिव्यक्ति पर कई अहम फैसले दिए
✅ पारदर्शिता और न्यायिक सुधारों के प्रबल समर्थक हैं

📚 स्रोत: भारत सरकार – कानून एवं न्याय मंत्रालय, इंडिया टुडे, टाइम्स ऑफ इंडिया, NDTV (अक्टूबर 2025)

🤔 क्या आपको लगता है कि जस्टिस सूर्यकांत के कार्यकाल में न्याय व्यवस्था में बड़े बदलाव देखने को मिलेंगे?
👇 अपनी राय कमेंट में बताएं!

2 months ago | [YT] | 7

The LLB Guide

🇮🇳 कानून मंत्रालय द्वारा राज्यसभा को दी गई जानकारी के अनुसार, भारत में कुल 20,13,081 पंजीकृत अधिवक्ता (वकील) हैं, जो देश के विभिन्न राज्यों और न्यायालयों में कार्यरत हैं। (अगस्त 2023 तक का डेटा)

🏛️ सबसे अधिक पंजीकृत अधिवक्ताओं वाले राज्य:
1️⃣ उत्तर प्रदेश – 4,00,016
2️⃣ महाराष्ट्र एवं गोवा – 1,91,394
3️⃣ दिल्ली (NCT) – 1,49,655

🗣️ यह जानकारी एक अतारांकित प्रश्न (Unstarred Question) के उत्तर में दी गई थी, जिसमें देशभर के विभिन्न न्यायालयों और राज्यों में पंजीकृत अधिवक्ताओं की संख्या पूछी गई थी।

2 months ago | [YT] | 6

The LLB Guide

📊 How many registered advocates are there in India?

🇮🇳 According to the Ministry of Law & Justice, as informed to the Rajya Sabha, there are a total of 20,13,081 registered Advocates across various courts and States in India (as of August 2023).

🏛️ Top States with the most registered Advocates:
1️⃣ Uttar Pradesh – 4,00,016
2️⃣ Maharashtra & Goa – 1,91,394
3️⃣ NCT of Delhi – 1,49,655

🗣️ The data was shared in response to an unstarred question regarding the total number of registered lawyers in India, State and Court-wise.

📚 Source: Ministry of Law & Justice (Rajya Sabha, Aug 2023)

2 months ago | [YT] | 7