Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
Suspended from practice — 1 year
The regulator’s term: suspension
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Khush Bakhat Muhammad Zeeshan, doctor (General Medical Council 7096504).
Decision date: 3 March 2026 · Hearing started 9 February 2026 and ended 3 March 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Khush Bakhat Muhammad Zeeshan's fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct after finding that, in two separate incidents in February and March 2021, he carried out sexually motivated touching of two junior female colleagues at his hospital under the guise of clinical examination or treatment, without their consent. The tribunal directed that his registration be suspended for 12 months, with a review hearing before the suspension ends, and imposed an immediate order of suspension.
Charges
It was alleged that, on 20 February 2021, Dr Zeeshan agreed to examine the armpit area of a colleague, Ms A, and during the examination pressed his palms against her breasts and nipples, placed his fingers just above her areolas, and lifted her breasts upwards; that he failed to explain his actions or seek prior consent; and that those actions were sexually motivated. It was further alleged that, on 13 March 2021, he offered to treat another colleague, Ms B, by manipulating her back without obtaining adequate informed consent; that during the treatment he massaged her legs, thighs, arms, back, bottom and shoulders, climbed onto the bed and straddled her, rubbed his penis against her, put his hands under her top onto her skin, and continued the contact after climbing off the bed; and that those actions were undertaken without consent, were not clinically indicated, and were sexually motivated.
Findings
The Tribunal found most of the allegations relating to Ms A proved (the touching of her breasts, nipples and areolas, the failure to explain or seek consent, and that those actions were sexually motivated). It found the lifting of Ms A's breasts not proved. In respect of Ms B, the Tribunal found admitted and proved the failure to obtain informed consent, and found proved the massaging of her legs, thighs, arms, back, bottom and shoulders, the straddling, the contact under her top onto her skin, and that the actions were undertaken without consent, were not clinically indicated, and were sexually motivated. It found the specific allegations of rubbing his penis against Ms B not proved. The Tribunal determined that Dr Zeeshan's misconduct was at the higher end of the spectrum of seriousness, was predatory and opportunistic, breached fundamental tenets of the medical profession (paragraphs 1, 36 and 65 of Good Medical Practice), and that his fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
The Tribunal recorded the following mitigating features at the sanction stage: that Dr Zeeshan has continued to work since these events without any further concerns; that he has some insight into some aspects of his clinical practice, particularly in relation to chaperones; and the testimonials from his clinical colleagues, and his appraisals.
Aggravating factors
The Tribunal recorded the following aggravating features at the sanction stage: that Dr Zeeshan acted in a sexually motivated way towards two junior colleagues and took advantage of situations for his own gratification.
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.