A sessions court has revoked the interim pre-arrest bail of a doctor in a case pertaining to the sexual abuse and brutal torture of a 19-year-old woman who had died after remaining in coma for over two weeks.
Shanti was brutally raped and tortured by her husband two days after their marriage on June 15. She was first taken to a private hospital and later brought back home after her condition did not improve. She was then taken to Dr Ruth Pfau Civil Hospital Karachi (CHK), where she remained in a coma for two weeks before dying on July 23.
Additional Sessions Judge (South) Abdul Zahoor Chandio took up an application filed by Dr Muhammad Rauf Shaikh seeking confirmation of the interim bail granted to him. He observed that this was not a fit case for the grant of pre-arrest bail. “Accordingly, the pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the applicant/accused by this court vide order dated 27.09.2025 is hereby recalled, consequently, the instant bail application stands dismissed,” he ruled.
The judge ordered the Sindh Healthcare Commission to take “appropriate legal and administrative action” against both the doctor and private hospital over failure to report the incident to police when the victim was first brought to the health facility for treatment. It called for an independent inquiry into the practices and standards of the hospital to determine violations of the Sindh Healthcare Commission Act.
In his order, the judge noted that the victim was admitted to the private hospital in a critical condition and was under the care of the doctor. “It also appeared that applicant/accused, instead of providing the necessary medical care and ensuring the victim’s safety, performed a surgery and subsequently discharged her despite her precarious condition,” he added.
“It also revealed that the incident was not reported to the police as required under the law and instead the applicant/accused and hospital administration facilitated the preparation of an affidavit, purportedly to exonerate them from any liability.”
He said the victim later expired and her post-mortem examination revealed that the treatment provided was grossly inadequate and the discharge was unwarranted. “The narrative of medical failure begins at the first private hospital whose actions set a tragic and irreversible chain of events into motion,” the judge observed, adding that her discharge after initial surgery proved to be catastrophically premature.
“The main duty of a doctor and hospital, especially in a case of violent crime, is to protect the patient and report the crime, not to protect the family’s reputation. By letting the family who included the possible perpetrator decide not to report, the hospital failed in its duty to the patient.”
The court pointed out that the actions of the applicant and the hospital went beyond just failing to report a crime. “This is not just a simple omission, but a deliberate attempt to hide evidence and protect the accused, which could be seen as criminal complicity. The conduct of the applicant/accused is not only a violation of medical ethics but also of statutory obligations under the Sindh Healthcare Commission Act, 2013 and Sindh Injured Persons (Medical Aid) Act, 2014.”
Section 3 of the Act mandates that every hospital, whether public or private, shall provide immediate medical aid to every injured person, especially in cases of offences or violence, without waiting for medico-legal formalities, the judge explained.
Section 4 prohibits refusal or delay in treatment, and Section 5 imposes a duty on the hospital administration and attending doctor to inform the nearest police station regarding the admission of any injured person in such circumstances, the judge added.
“The failure of the accused doctor and the hospital administration to comply with these statutory duties constitutes a clear violation of the law, for which section 6 prescribes penal consequences,” he said.
The defence counsel argued that the applicant was not nominated in the FIR, nor was there any specific allegation against him regarding the alleged offence. He emphasised that the applicant, a qualified and registered medical practitioner, was officially called upon to examine and treat the victim in his professional capacity with no personal or professional enmity towards any party involved.
He said the girl was brought to the hospital in a critical condition and there she was immediately operated upon. During the surgery, it was discovered that she had severe internal injuries, he said, adding that it was during the surgery that the applicant realised that the case involved medico-legal implications.
The counsel said that he promptly informed the family members about the seriousness of the injuries and advised them to report the matter to police. However, he added that the family members, including the father and husband of the deceased, declined to involve law enforcement citing concerns about social stigma and reputational harm.
Special Public Prosecutor Irfana Qadri contended that the applicant in collusion with others screened the offence of murder committed by the principal suspect, Ashok, who brutally assaulted and killed his wife. The applicant being doctor was legally bound to report the incident to the police and refer the patient to a government hospital for medico-legal treatment but he deliberately failed to do so.
She claimed that the applicant obtained an affidavit from the victim’s family containing undertaking not to report the incident to the police, which was part of the record and demonstrated his active participation in concealing the crime along with the administration of private hospital.