A physician who physically harmed himself to falsely accuse a patient of assault in order to have him removed from the clinic has been suspended for a year.
Dr Gurkirit Kalkat, aged 58, called the man to Thames View Medical Centre in Dagenham, Essex, in February 2020.
Instead of a regular check-up, he threw himself against the door, hit himself in the chest, and cried out, ‘Stop hitting me, ouch! You’re attacking me!’ before triggering the emergency alarm.
The confused patient, who had merely observed from his seat during the strange incident, was escorted home in handcuffs following a police intervention.
An investigation unearthed the doctor’s desire to remove the patient, who was struggling with substance abuse issues, from his patient roster as the clinic was in the process of merging with another physician’s practice.
Kalkat, hailing from Loughton, was found guilty of severe professional misconduct and barred from practicing medicine for a year. He had vehemently denied any misconduct.
The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service was informed that he had fabricated a terminal blood cancer diagnosis for the patient to coerce him to switch to another doctor and even covered over £40,000 personally to fund rehabilitation therapy.
During a prior consultation, the patient clandestinely recorded the doctor as he falsely claimed to have six months left to live and offered an additional £15,000 to switch practices.
However, Patient A failed to register at another clinic, and on February 3, 2020, he was asked to attend an appointment where the staged assault unfolded.
The patient recounted: ‘I entered his office for my appointment, he provided me with four weeks’ worth of prescriptions. Then, he got up, walked towards the door, pushed himself slightly against it and hit his chest with his fist, saying “stop hitting me”.
‘I remained seated and began to chuckle slightly because I initially thought he was joking. But then he said to his receptionist, “You saw him hit me, didn’t you?” and she affirmed, “Yes, I did”.
‘He told me, “Now that you have resorted to violence, you must exit my clinic”. I retorted, “What are you doing, are you serious or is this a sick prank?”
‘I said to Dr. Kalkat, “I have not committed any offense, and now that I have figured out your scheme to remove me from your list, by fabricating a blood cancer death lie and attempting to bribe me with money to change clinics due to your upcoming merger with another doctor,”.
‘The receptionist advised Dr. Kalkat, “You should press the emergency button,” so he briskly walked past me, still firmly seated, and activated the button. I had not moved from my seat.
‘Both responding policemen believed my side and doubted Dr. Kalkat’s account. I was released without charge. Dr. Kalkat confessed to one officer that he had deceived me about my cancer diagnosis to coerce me to switch clinics.’
‘Dr. Kalkat simulated as if I had struck him, but he was hitting himself while shouting that I was attacking him. I affirm that I did not lay a hand on Dr. Kalkat; I remained seated in my chair throughout.’
Kalkat chose not to attend the MPTS hearing, instead submitting written statements through legal representation, citing concerns about the ‘safety’ of appearing in person due to the patient’s ‘unpredictable’ behavior.
The receptionist who allegedly witnessed the incident was reportedly ‘absent or unable’ to provide an official account.
Announcing the panel’s decision, MPTS chairman Mr. Stephen Killen stated: ‘Patient A volunteered to present oral testimony on all occurrences, even subject to cross-examination.
‘Regarding the assault allegation against Dr. Kalkat, Patient A was resolute in maintaining his innocence.
‘Dr. Kalkat had adopted increasingly unsuitable, desperate, and deceitful tactics to prompt Patient A to enroll elsewhere.
‘It was evident that by falsely accusing Patient A of violence towards him, Dr. Kalkat sought to relinquish his obligations as Patient A’s doctor.’
‘The panel had no opportunity to directly hear from Dr. Kalkat, preventing the validation of his statements through interrogation. Considering all accessible evidence, it was more probable than not that Dr. Kalkat’s claim to the police regarding Patient A’s assault was inaccurate.
‘The Tribunal concluded that the bulk of evidence pointed towards Dr. Kalkat engineering the incident as part of his scheme to force Patient A out of his patient roster.’
Connect with our news team via email at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For similar stories, visit our news page on our website.
