Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — review 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 Sereesha Rani Veleshala, doctor (General Medical Council 6096376).
Decision date: 7 November 2025 · Hearing started 7 November 2025
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found at the first review of Dr Sereesha Rani Veleshala's case that her fitness to practise is no longer impaired. The tribunal determined she had fully remediated the clinical and probity failings found at her 2024 hearing through extensive CPD, coaching, and reflection, and that the risk of repetition is extremely low. The existing 12-month suspension was allowed to run to its natural expiry on 25 November 2025.
Charges
Review of 12-month suspension imposed by the 2024 Tribunal. Original findings (2024): clinical failings in the care of Patient A on 11 February 2020, including failure to take adequate history, failure to assess neurological status, and failure to conduct necessary investigations; dishonestly amending Patient A's medical notes after the patient went into cardiac arrest without recording that amendments were retrospective; dishonestly denying the amendments to a colleague and to the Coroner's inquest.
Findings
At the first review hearing, the tribunal determined that Dr Veleshala's fitness to practise is no longer impaired by reason of misconduct. The tribunal found she had fully remediated her clinical failings through extensive CPD, regular observation of colleagues, and attendance at post-ward-round discussions. It found she had demonstrated full insight into her dishonesty through detailed written reflection, coaching, and oral evidence, and that the risk of repetition was extremely low. The tribunal directed the existing suspension to run to its expiry on 25 November 2025, allowing Dr Veleshala to return to unrestricted practice thereafter.
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If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.