By | The Spotlight Editorial Board
In a system governed by laws and codes of conduct, accountability should be the bedrock of public service. Yet in Karnah, the handling of a disturbing incident at Sub-District Hospital (SDH) Tangdhar has revealed how fragile accountability becomes when officials play the roles of judge, jury, and executioner, and then, astonishingly, of exonerator as well.
The controversy centers on a gynecologist, Dr. Jamshed, whose conduct has been repeatedly flagged in official correspondence. On April 18, 2025, the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) Kupwara issued a Show Cause Notice to the doctor, citing “serious misconduct, and exploitation by you in your capacity as a Government Medical Officer.” The letter accused him of diverting patients from the government hospital to his private clinic for profit, allegedly charging ₹300 per consultation. It further alleged that he pressured a pregnant patient to undergo an unnecessary C-section at his clinic, made “derogatory, unprofessional, and disrespectful remarks” against media and officials, and even claimed he gave “financial kickbacks with officials.” The CMO’s letter concluded by withholding his salary “with immediate effect until further orders” and directing him to explain why disciplinary action should not be initiated.
Those are not the words of a trivial reprimand. They are grave charges that, if true, undermine both the integrity of the medical profession and public trust in the health system. They demanded serious inquiry.
Matters came to a head weeks later when a fresh incident unfolded at SDH Tangdhar. In his letter to the CMO, the Block Medical Officer (BMO) Tangdhar described what he personally witnessed: a young woman, 25-year-old Dilshada Begum, pleading for a minor procedure. When the doctor refused, she pressed her case. According to the BMO’s written report, “Dr. Jamshed suddenly in rage pushed the lady forcefully. She was carrying her child also. He was overpowered immediately by staff and the lady went into syncope outside the gate of gynae section.” Police had to intervene, taking the doctor briefly into custody as law and order frayed at the hospital.
The BMO’s account does not stop at this incident. His letter states that Dr. Jamshed’s “behaviour towards patients is often abusive and he is not following official directions.” He further notes that despite being assigned emergency surgeries, the doctor “has never done any surgery during night” and is not performing his duties “satisfactorily.” The BMO concluded with a recommendation: the doctor should be removed from SDH Tangdhar to avoid further disruption.
Taken together, the CMO’s April notice and the BMO’s post-incident report paint a consistent, disturbing picture of misconduct. The logical step should have been an impartial investigation, disciplinary proceedings, and, if allegations were confirmed, corrective action. Instead, what followed was a bizarre reversal.
In a video circulated after the Tangdhar incident, the same BMO who had described the doctor’s abusive behavior now appeared before the press, downplaying the matter. The doctor himself issued his own “clean chit,” and patient attendants, visibly uncomfortable, were presented to declare the issue “resolved.” No inquiry, no disciplinary hearing, no transparency, only a hasty public relations exercise masquerading as resolution.
The style of such a process, where the CMO, BMO, and others assume the role of judge, jury, and executioner, is nothing short of a mockery of both the justice system and the code of law. Who gave them the right to do so? If this logic were to be applied elsewhere, even a murderer could be given a clean chit after the victim’s family “forgives” him, never mind whether such forgiveness was genuine or extracted under pressure. Governance by staged reconciliation is not justice; it is coercion dressed up as closure.
This abrupt about-face raises pressing questions. If the allegations in the official letters were accurate, why was no action taken? And if they were false, why were such damning accusations written, circulated to higher authorities, and used to justify withholding salary? Either way, the credibility of the health administration in Kupwara has been gravely compromised.
What is most corrosive here is the precedent being set. Officials cannot be allowed to weaponize their authority one day and nullify their own accusations the next. Justice is not a matter of convenience, nor can it be decided in a press talk. The arbitrary absolution of misconduct, whether under pressure or expedience, is not governance. It is mockery.
The broader implications are stark. For patients in Karnah, many of whom already struggle with limited access to quality healthcare, the message is chilling: even if you are mistreated, your complaint can vanish in a fog of bureaucratic doublespeak. For doctors, it sends the opposite message: misconduct may be excused as long as you enjoy the protection of pliant superiors. In both cases, accountability, the very principle that should guarantee trust in public institutions, is shredded.
The letters themselves stand as evidence. On April 18, the CMO directed Dr. Jamshed to explain his “serious misconduct” and ordered his salary withheld. On the day of the Tangdhar incident, the BMO described in detail how the doctor pushed a patient and routinely disobeyed orders. These were not rumors or media reports; they were formal, written communications by the highest local health authorities. To later stage a media performance erasing those allegations is not just negligence, it is an abdication of duty.
Healthcare is not a theater where officials may script and rescript narratives to suit their needs. It is a system built on public trust, professional integrity, and the rule of law. When those principles are trampled, the damage is not limited to one hospital or one doctor. It spreads through the entire fabric of public faith in governance.
The people of Karnah deserve answers. They deserve an independent inquiry into both the doctor’s conduct and the administrative handling of the case. They deserve to know whether their health system protects patients or shields misbehavior. And above all, they deserve to live under a system where justice is not mocked but upheld.
Until that happens, the spectacle at SDH Tangdhar will remain a grim symbol of how easily accountability can be sacrificed and how quickly officials can forget that they are not above the law, but bound by it.
