AIIMS defends sacking: conduct unbecoming

But Newsline accessed the dismissal order,issued on the instructions of Azad,which clearly stated that Shejoy’s actions “amount to conduct unbecoming of a medical doctor at the institute”.

“Following facts have been established on the basis of the report of the Committee: (a) Dr Shejoy did take the 8-year-old boy to the doctor’s room purportedly for helping him to pass urine; (b) He did not respond to the telephone call(s) made by the sister-on-duty; (c) He also did not respond when the sister-on-duty knocked at the doctor’s duty room; (d) He did not take the assistance of any nursing staff for examination of the patient,” stated the dismissal order.

The order mentions that the committee made the following observations: “(1) The child was able to narrate the whole incident clearly as written in the complaint without any hesitation or pause; (2) The child told Dr Shejoy that he wanted to pass urine and Dr Shejoy had taken him to the toilet in the doctor’s duty room; (3) the door of the doctor’s duty room was not locked at the time of the alleged incident; (4) The child narrated the alleged incident to his mother the next morning; (5) The parents had taken the child to the NS II ward in the evening of January 24 to identify the doctor; (6) Dr Shejoy had touched the genitalia (penis) of patient in the doctor’s duty room; (7) Dr Shejoy had taken the child to the doctor’s duty room without informing the nursing staff; (8) Dr Shejoy came out when he received Sister Sinija’s call on his duty mobile phone. However,he did not answer the call.”

Sources said the committee had “not completed their inquiry” since the police had taken over the case on January 31.

The report,the sources said,had not suggested any pronouncement of the doctor’s guilt and had in fact suggested “further investigations” along with “a summary of preliminary findings.” Sources said the report also specified the “direction” of these investigations since the child repeated his written complaint verbatim whenever he was questioned.

The committee has also hinted at an investigation into the nurse’s statement since she herself should have been constantly present with the child.

In his defence,Dr Shejoy claims he examined the boy with the door to the room open. The reply does not mention that the nurse had knocked on the duty room door. He said “received a call from her on his duty mobile phone” while coming out of the room with the boy but did not take it since he “immediately entered the ICU.”