Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
No impairment found
What does “no impairment found” mean?
The regulator considered the case and found that the practitioner's fitness to practise was not currently impaired. No restrictions are imposed.
Concerning Atif Zaman, doctor (General Medical Council 7125418).
Decision date: 30 January 2026 · Hearing started 5 January 2026 and ended 30 January 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found none of the allegations against Dr Atif Zaman proved. The General Medical Council had alleged he behaved in a threatening manner towards Ms A on several occasions between 2017 and 2021. The tribunal found inconsistencies in the supporting witness evidence and could not verify the dates of disputed photographs, an email and WhatsApp messages relied on by the GMC. On 30 January 2026 it concluded that the GMC had not discharged the burden of proof and that Dr Zaman's fitness to practise was not impaired.
Charges
Allegations of misconduct relating to Dr Zaman's personal conduct towards Ms A on a number of occasions between 2017 and 2021, including allegations that he behaved in a threatening manner by grabbing her arm and pinning her against a car window in November 2017; shouting at her and pinning her to a wall in July 2018; physical conduct including pushing her onto a bed, restraining her, biting her face, holding her by the throat, and uttering threatening words in April 2019; and further alleged threatening conduct on 31 July 2021 including holding her arms, pushing her against a wall, and taking her phone.
Findings
The Tribunal found none of the paragraphs of the Allegation proved on the balance of probabilities. It concluded that the GMC had not discharged the burden of proof in respect of key supporting evidence including disputed photographs, an email purporting to contain admissions of violence, and WhatsApp messages, none of which could be verified as to date or provenance. The Tribunal identified a number of inconsistencies in the witness evidence supporting the Allegation. It found that arguments had taken place between Dr Zaman and Ms A but that the GMC had not proved that the conduct escalated to physical violence or threatening behaviour. As none of the facts were found proved, the Tribunal confirmed there is no impairment to Dr Zaman's fitness to practise.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.