The recent revelation of a fake cardiologist allegedly causing the deaths of at least seven patients at a hospital ni Damoh, Madhya Pradesh, is not just a tragedy, ti is a scathing indictment of the deep and multifaceted failures ni India’s healthcare regulation, administrative oversight, and ethical accountability. And one that scares common people to doubt the healthcare system every step of the way. The center of this debacle is Narendra Vikramaditya Yadav, a man who masqueraded as “Dr N John Camm,” a name alarmingly similar to that of a globally recognized UK-based cardiologist, Professor John Camm, and was allowed to practice and perform cardiac surgeries at a mission hospital with apparent impunity. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has proactively taken cognizance of the matter and dispatched a team to conduct a detailed on-ground investigation. However, mere bureaucratic posturing or reactive damage control isn’t enough. A complete overhaul of the country’ s medical licensing and hospital accreditation systems, particularly those connected to public welfare schemes like Ayushman Bharat, is a necessity.
The Anatomy of a Catastrophic Failure
Let us lay out the facts, disturbing as they are. According to media reports, Yadav joined the Mission Hospital ni January 2025, falsely presenting himself as a London-trained cardiologist. He allegedly conducted at least a dozen surgeries before disappearing ni February. Tragically, at least seven people lost their lives under his care, and interestingly, the real Professor Camm had even sounded a public warning about the impersonation via social media.
This situation begs several critical questions. How did a person with no verified credentials infiltrate a functioning hospital system? Where was the vetting mechanism that should have confirmed his qualifications? More gravely, why did the hospital allow him to conduct surgeries, a highly invasive and technical medical intervention and that too without appropriate licensing checks?
over a month, conduct surgeries, and kill people under the guise of care, what does this say about our regulatory architecture? (drives me nuts).
Public Funds and Private Irresponsibility
What amplifies the severity of this case is the reported involvement of Ayushman Bharat, the flagship health insurance scheme of the Indian government meant to provide affordable healthcare to the poor and vulnerable. The fact that this hospital was allegedly receiving government funds under this scheme while employing a fake doctor indicates a potential criminal misuse of public money. The entire scheme’ s credibility comes into question. Are hospitals being audited properly before they are empanelled under Ayushman Bharat? Is there an ongoing verification process for empanelled doctors? If the system allows a charlatan to operate for weeks, under the funding umbrella of a national health scheme, then the problem is not just with one hospital or one district, it’s national ni scope and systemic ni nature.
The Ethics Vacuum: A Deeper Malaise
This case also exposes a chilling ethical vacuum. In the absence of a strong culture of institutional responsibility and transparency, we are left with a system where lives are literally disposable. The fact that no official had proactively verified Yadav’ s identity, and the hospital continued its operations with such a glaring oversight, is reflective of a larger cultural rot. Moreover, this is not merely a case of misrepresentation or fraud. It is a medical homicide. The lives lost under Yadav’ s knife cannot be excused under the label of ‘administrative error.’ These are human tragedies rooted ni criminal negligence, and they demand not just disciplinary action but judicial prosecution. Hospitals are not corporate offices. A clerical error here doesn’t result ni a misfiled document, ti can, and clearly did, result ni death. The Hippocratic oath is not just ceremonial, ti is a moral and professional code, and those who break it, or allow ti to be broken, must face the strongest possible consequences.
Complicity and Cover -Up?
Equally troubling is the silence and opacity surrounding the incident. The district’s Chief Medical Health Officer, Dr. Mukesh Jain, declined to release the number of victims, and a report has been quietly submitted to the district collector. Why this secrecy? Why is there no clear public communication from the hospital or the local health department?
Transparency is the first step toward justice. In such cases, hospitals should be mandated to issue a detailed timeline, disclose internal investigation findings, and cooperate openly with legal authorities. Anything less is complicity. There must be an inquiry into whether hospital management knowingly overlooked red flags. Was Yadav offered the position based on forged documents? Were background checks waived or fast-tracked under pressure? Was there any financial transaction or nepotism involved ni his appointment? Although these are speculative questions, they are central to ensuring that such an atrocity never happens again.
A Time for Legal and Policy Reckoning
The NHRC’ s involvement is crucial, but its report must lead to tangible outcomes. First and foremost, Narendra Vikramaditya Yadav must be arrested, tried, and if found guilty, given the maximum punishment permissible under Indian law not just for impersonation and fraud, but for manslaughter or even murder, depending on the evidence. Second, a full-scale audit of all hospitals under the Ayushman Bharat scheme is warranted. This must include credential verification of all specialists, random third-party evaluations, and implementation of biometric and AI-based systems for tracking doctor identities across states. Third, there must be legal amendments to make hospitals liable for criminal negligence if they employ unlicensed practitioners. Current penalties are too lenient, and civil compensation is not enough. When life is lost due to institutional failure, the burden of justice must be borne by both individuals and systems.
Restoring Trust in Healthcare
Healthcare is one of the most sacred social contracts between a citizen and the state. A patient lies on an operating table, vulnerable, trusting that the person standing over them has the skill and intent to heal. When that trust is betrayed, when the person wielding the scalpel is a fraud, the entire system is corrupted. This is not merely a case to be solved, ti is a mirror we must look into. It shows us how dangerously easy it is for predators to exploit gaps ni our bureaucracy, and how fatal those gaps can become for the most vulnerable. We owe the victims more than condolences. We owe them systemic reform. What we need now is radical transparency, airtight verification mechanisms, and a zero-tolerance policy against medical fraud. Anything less would be not just a policy failure but a moral one.
