The recent FIR against Dr. Sushrut Ghaisas, a consulting gynecologist in Pune, for alleged medical negligence in the tragic death of 37-year-old pregnant woman Tanisha Bhise, has triggered a wave of support from leading gynecological associations and the wider medical fraternity. These organizations assert that Dr. Ghaisas did not commit medical negligence and are calling for a transparent, unbiased investigation into the case.
The controversy began after Tanisha Bhise was denied emergency admission at Deenanath Mangeshkar Hospital (DMH) on March 28, 2025, reportedly due to her family’s inability to pay a ₹10 lakh deposit. She was subsequently transferred to Surya Hospital, where she delivered twins, and later to Manipal Hospital, where she passed away on March 31. Following her death, a series of inquiry reports were commissioned by Sassoon General Hospital and other state bodies. While the initial reports pointed to systemic lapses at multiple hospitals, a revised report specifically attributed negligence to Dr. Ghaisas, leading to an FIR under Section 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
However, the medical community has strongly contested these findings. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) and other gynecological groups argue that the revised report’s conclusions are flawed and that the investigation process itself was marred by procedural lapses. Dr. Sanjay Patil, national secretary of the Hospital Board of India (IMA), highlighted that the expert committee did not include a representative from the Maharashtra Medical Council, violating a 2016 government resolution. He further questioned the logic of holding an individual doctor criminally liable for systemic delays, noting, “Delays can happen in hospitals. That doesn't automatically make the doctor criminally responsible. If a doctor is attending to one critical patient and another arrives, what should they do — abandon one for the other?”
Dr. Sunil Ingle, president of IMA Pune, emphasized that hospital financial policies—such as the deposit rule—are determined by management, not individual doctors. “No action has been taken against the hospital management, yet the doctor faces an FIR,” he said, underscoring the need for accountability at the institutional level rather than targeting a single practitioner.
The IMA and allied associations have pledged legal support to Dr. Ghaisas and are preparing to challenge the FIR in court. They have also raised concerns about possible political interference and manipulation in the inquiry process, demanding a thorough, impartial review of all evidence.
Meanwhile, health activists like Dr. Abhijit More have called for a broader scope of accountability, insisting that both doctors and hospital administrations must answer for lapses in patient care. The case has sparked public outrage and protests, with calls for stricter enforcement of patient rights and hospital regulations.
As the investigation continues, Pune’s medical community stands firmly behind Dr. Sushrut Ghaisas, insisting that he acted within the bounds of medical ethics and did not display negligence. They urge authorities to ensure that justice is served through a fair and balanced process, and that systemic issues in healthcare delivery are addressed to prevent such tragedies in the future.
