Chhatarpur Chemistry Professor Mamta Pathak, who was found guilty in the murder of her husband Dr. Neeraj Pathak, has been sentenced. The Madhya Pradesh High Court has sentenced Mamta Pathak to life imprisonment. In the 97 -page decision, the MP High Court has upheld the decision of the lower court.

This case of Mamta Pathak had become a big topic of discussion on the Internet. Mamta Pathak, who taught chemistry to children, fought her case without a lawyer.

What was the Neeraj Pathak murder case?
In the year 2022, government doctor Neeraj Pathak was murdered. It was revealed that Neeraj Pathak’s wife had been having some dispute with Mamta for a long time. After this, in 2021, Neeraj Pathak suddenly died in his house under suspicious circumstances.

In the initial investigation, the police had expressed suspicion that Neeraj Pathak died due to current. However, forensic and post -mortem reports raised questions. After some time, the investigating officers accused wife Mamta Pathak of murder.

Mamta Pathak challenged the decision of the district court
The district court had sentenced Mamta Pathak to life imprisonment on the basis of medical report and other evidence. Mamta was granted interim bail for some time so that she could take care of her son. During this, Mamta challenged the decision of the district court in Jabalpur High Court and said to fight her case herself.

In the court, Mamta Pathak presented her case very confident and said in the court that thermal and electric burn could look the same. Only the difference between the chemical analysis could be told. Hearing this answer, everyone was surprised in the court.

That’s why Mamta Pathak went viral
When the judge questioned Mamta Pathak whether he is a chemistry professor? He replied yes. Mamta Pathak’s scientific argument, patience even under pressure and the ability to break even during the murder case made her viral on the Internet. The clip of the hearing became very viral on social media.

Brahmin priests in temples: The Madhya Pradesh High Court, while taking a serious stand on a public interest litigation filed on the appointments of Brahmin priests in temples controlled by the state government, has issued notice to various departments of the state government and directed to file replies within 4 weeks. This petition was filed by the Azad Employees Organization (Ajax), in which the constitutional validity of the appointment process of priests in temples has been challenged.

What is the case of petition?

Ajax has alleged in its petition that only Brahmin caste persons are being appointed as priests in more than 350 temples controlled by the Madhya Pradesh government. It has been said in the petition that these temples are built on the land of the state government and these temples are being operated completely by the Department of Spirituality. The priests are also provided salaries from the government.

On behalf of the petitioner, senior advocates Rameshwar Singh Thakur and Pushpendra Shah said that this appointment policy violates Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Advocates argued that when people of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (OBC) are also included in Hindu society, only appointing Brahmins as priests promotes social and constitutional inequality.

Question on temple bill 2019

The petition, especially in the year 2019, has been challenged by the Temple Bill 2019 passed by the Department of Spirituality. The petitioner says that through this bill, the state government established control of religious institutions and provision was made to appoint a salaried priest. However, information about this law was not given to the general public.

State government objection

On behalf of the state government, Deputy Advocate General Abhijeet Awasthi questioned the validity of the petition and said that Ajax is an employee organization, which does not have the legal right to file such a petition. He argued that the tradition of worship in temples has been going on for centuries and the state government has not had a direct role in it.

High court comments and next hearing

A division bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain while hearing the petition said that the matter is related to the right to equality provided by the Constitution and the government will have to give a clear answer to this.

The court has issued notices to the Chief Secretary, Principal Secretary (General Administration), Religious Trust and Religion Department, Ministry of Social Justice and Public Works Department. The court has directed all the concerned departments to file a reply in this matter within four weeks. The next hearing date will be fixed soon by the court.

Also read: CM Mohan Yadav said in BJP’s tricolor journey, ‘People of all society have widespread participation’