Medical Negligence and Malpractice Law in Bangladesh: Claims, Complaints and Compensation in 2026

Medical negligence Bangladesh law in 2026: a system of parallel routes

Medical negligence Bangladesh law does not sit in one statute. A patient harmed by careless treatment, or a family that has lost someone in a hospital, must assemble a remedy from five separate sources: the common law of tort, the Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009, the disciplinary powers of the Bangladesh Medical and Dental Council, the negligence offences in the Penal Code 1860 and the writ jurisdiction of the High Court Division. Each route has its own forum, its own standard of proof and its own deadline, and the shortest of those deadlines is only thirty days.

This guide explains how each route works in practice in 2026: what negligence and malpractice mean, how to bring a civil claim for compensation, when a consumer complaint is worth filing, how criminal cases under section 304A are investigated, what the BMDC can and cannot do, which High Court Division cases have actually produced compensation, how private hospitals are licensed, how to build the medical evidence and what the limitation rules require. It also sets out where the long-promised patient protection law stands after the 2025 drafts and the 2026 drafting committee.

Summary: There is no dedicated medical negligence statute or tribunal in Bangladesh. Compensation is sought through a civil suit in tort, a civil suit under section 66 of the Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009 or a writ petition in the High Court Division; punishment through a consumer complaint or a criminal case under section 304A or sections 337 and 338 of the Penal Code; and professional sanction through a complaint to the BMDC. Most serious cases use two or three routes at once, so the sequence and the deadlines matter from the first day.

Key point: The clock starts early. A consumer complaint about a paid health service must reach the consumer rights directorate within 30 days of the cause of action or it is inadmissible, and a civil suit for compensation for personal injury, or by a family under the Fatal Accidents Act 1855, must generally be filed within one year of the injury or the death. A family that waits for the outcome of a BMDC complaint or a police investigation before taking civil advice can lose the compensation route altogether.

At a glance

Swipe or scroll →

Table of Contents

What medical negligence Bangladesh law covers: negligence and malpractice

Negligence in the medical setting is a failure by a doctor, nurse, technician or hospital to exercise the degree of skill and care that a reasonably competent practitioner in the same field would exercise, where that failure causes harm. Malpractice is the wider professional term: it covers negligence but also misconduct such as treating without consent, practising outside one's competence, falsifying records or delegating clinical work to unqualified staff. In medical negligence Bangladesh practice the two terms are often used interchangeably, but the distinction matters, because some routes require proof of harm caused by carelessness while others punish improper conduct even where the harm is harder to prove.

Bangladesh inherited its medico-legal framework from the British system, and its courts apply common law principles of duty, breach and causation rather than a code. The practical consequence is that every claim, whatever the forum, turns on the same three questions: did the practitioner or hospital owe the patient a duty of care, did the care fall below the accepted professional standard, and did that failure cause the injury or death complained of.

The standard of care

The standard is that of the ordinary competent practitioner in the relevant specialty, judged by the knowledge and resources available at the time, not with hindsight. A poor outcome is not by itself negligence: treatment can fail despite proper care, and a reasonable choice between two accepted approaches is not a breach. What usually establishes breach is a clear departure from accepted practice, such as operating on the wrong site, failing to monitor a patient under anaesthesia, ignoring obvious warning signs or proceeding without the necessary equipment or staff.

Consent and good faith

The Penal Code protects acts done in good faith for a patient's benefit with the patient's express or implied consent, and acts done in good faith for a patient who cannot consent in time.[1] Those defences are narrower than they look, because the Code also provides that nothing is done in good faith if it is done without due care and attention.[1] A doctor who acts carelessly therefore cannot shelter behind consent, and a procedure performed without consent, such as an unplanned operation on a different site, can found a complaint even where the surgery was technically competent.

Who can be liable

Liability can attach to the individual practitioner, to the hospital or clinic that employs or engages that practitioner, and to the hospital directly for failures of its own, such as unsafe premises, inadequate staffing, unlicensed operation or defective equipment and medicines. In many of the most serious cases the institutional failure is as important as the individual one, and claims should be framed against both.

Civil claims for compensation in tort

A civil suit for damages is the conventional route to compensation for medical negligence Bangladesh patients have suffered. Because the law of tort is uncodified, the claim is pleaded on common law principles in the ordinary civil courts, and the plaintiff must prove duty, breach, causation and loss on the balance of probabilities.

Claims by the patient

A patient who survives can claim for pain and suffering, loss of amenity, medical and rehabilitation costs, lost earnings and future care. The claim must be supported by medical evidence of the injury, its cause and its long-term effect, and by documents proving the financial losses. Where the harm was caused partly by the hospital's systems and partly by an individual practitioner, both should be joined as defendants.

Claims by the family after a death

Where a patient dies, the Fatal Accidents Act 1855 allows a suit where the death was caused by a wrongful act, neglect or default that would have entitled the deceased to sue had he or she survived. The suit is brought by and in the name of the executor, administrator or representative of the deceased, for the benefit of the wife, husband, parent and child, and the court awards damages proportionate to the loss each of them has suffered, dividing the amount among them in the shares it directs.[6] Only one suit lies for the same death, and a claim for loss to the estate can be added to it.[6]

Why civil claims remain rare

In practice, civil suits for medical negligence are uncommon. Ad valorem court fees on large damages claims, the length of civil trials, the difficulty of persuading one doctor to testify against another and the absence of any specialist tribunal all deter claimants. The 2026 Netra News investigation into nine deaths found families pursuing writ petitions, criminal cases and BMDC complaints far more often than ordinary damages suits, and found a Tk 8 crore compensation claim against a Dhaka hospital, filed in 2015, still stalled.[9] A civil suit is still worth filing where the loss is large and the evidence strong, but it should be filed within the limitation period and run alongside, not after, the other routes.

Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009 complaints

The Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009 is the most direct statutory route for medical negligence Bangladesh patients who paid for their treatment. The Act defines "service" to include health services made available to users for a price, and it expressly excludes services provided free of charge.[2] Private hospitals, clinics, diagnostic centres and paid consultations are therefore within the Act; free treatment in a government hospital generally is not.

The negligence offence in section 53

Section 53 makes it an offence for a service provider, through negligence, irresponsibility or carelessness, to cause a service recipient financial loss, harm to health or death. The penalty is imprisonment of up to three years, a fine of up to Tk 2 lakh, or both.[2] Section 52 separately punishes acts that endanger the life or safety of a service recipient in breach of a law or rule.[2] Commentators have pointed out that a maximum fine of Tk 2 lakh is modest when set against the loss of a life or a limb.[10]

How and when to complain

A case under the Act cannot be filed directly before a Magistrate. The complaint goes to the Director General of the consumer rights directorate, an officer he has empowered, the District Magistrate or an empowered Executive Magistrate.[2] It must be lodged within 30 days of the date the cause of action arose, or it will not be accepted, and if a charge sheet is not submitted within 90 days of the complaint the Magistrate cannot take cognisance of the offence.[2] Where an administrative fine is imposed and collected, 25 per cent of it is paid to the complainant.[2] In one 2024 case examined by Netra News, the directorate fined a Dhaka nursing home Tk 5 lakh after a raid.[9]

The civil remedy in section 66

Separately from any prosecution, section 66 allows a consumer who has suffered a loss capable of being valued in money to sue in the court of the Joint District Judge with local jurisdiction. The court may award compensation of up to five times the assessed loss, and the section applies notwithstanding the Code of Civil Procedure, the Contract Act and the Civil Courts Act.[2] This multiplier makes the section 66 suit a serious alternative to an ordinary tort claim for patients of private hospitals.

The limits of the consumer route

The directorate's powers over hospitals are deliberately constrained. Section 73 allows the Director General to monitor private health services and identify lapses, but not to take corrective action; he may only inform the Secretary of the health ministry and the Director General of Health Services.[2] The consumer route is therefore effective for fines and prosecutions against an individual provider, but systemic action against a hospital still runs through the health regulators and the courts.

Criminal cases under section 304A of the Penal Code

Where a patient dies, families most often turn first to the police. Section 304A of the Penal Code provides that whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for up to five years, or with fine, or with both.[1] Where the patient survives with grievous hurt, section 338 punishes causing grievous hurt by an act done so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or personal safety with up to two years, a fine of up to Tk 5,000, or both.[1] Section 337 covers simple hurt caused in the same way, and section 336 the endangering act itself.

The threshold for criminal liability

A section 304A case requires proof beyond reasonable doubt that the death was caused by the accused's rash or negligent act. Courts in the common law world have consistently required a higher degree of negligence for a criminal conviction than for civil liability, so an error of judgment, a recognised complication or a choice between accepted treatments will rarely be enough. Gross departures, such as a wrong-site operation, an unmonitored anaesthetic or treatment by unqualified staff, are the cases in which prosecution is realistic.

Investigation, arrest and bail

The criminal process usually begins with a first information report at the police station, followed by a post-mortem, seizure of records and an inquiry. Arrests of doctors after a death are common, but convictions are not: a Supreme Court lawyer with fifteen years of medical negligence work told Netra News in 2026 that he did not recall any trial court finding a doctor criminally liable, and the investigation found that criminal cases typically produced temporary arrests rather than verdicts.[9] Our guide to criminal law in Bangladesh explains the investigation, charge sheet and trial stages.

What a criminal case can and cannot achieve

A section 304A prosecution can produce accountability, preserve evidence through the investigation and add weight to a parallel BMDC complaint or writ petition. It does not by itself compensate the family. Families should also expect a long timetable: in the Ahnaf Tahmid case examined by Netra News, the criminal case and DGHS complaint were followed by a BMDC decision only some two years later, and police charges in the Ayan Ahmed case were filed in February 2026, two years after the child's death.[9]

BMDC complaints and professional discipline

The Bangladesh Medical and Dental Council is the statutory regulator of doctors and dentists under the Bangladesh Medical and Dental Council Act 2010 (Act No 61 of 2010). Section 22 prohibits anyone from practising allopathic medicine, or holding themselves out as a medical or dental practitioner, without BMDC registration, and makes a contravention an offence.[3] For patients, the BMDC's importance lies in its power to remove a practitioner from the register.

The BMDC's disciplinary powers

Section 23(1) of the 2010 Act allows the Council to cancel a practitioner's registration and remove the name from the register where he or she is found guilty of breaching the Act or the prescribed professional conduct and ethics. Section 24 requires the BMDC to notify the practitioner in writing within 90 days and gives an aggrieved practitioner 60 days to appeal to the Government, whose decision is final.[3] The standards themselves are set out in the BMDC Code of Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics, framed under section 5(22) of the Act.[8]

How a BMDC complaint proceeds

A complaint is filed with the Council, the doctor receives a copy and is asked for a written explanation, and the matter is listed before the Disciplinary Committee, which hears both sides. More complex cases are referred to an inquiry committee, which recommends action to the Council's head for a decision on penalty or dismissal.[9] The complainant should file a precise chronology, the medical records, any post-mortem or inquiry report and an independent expert opinion, because the committee's decision will rest on what is in the file.

The Zaheer Al-Amin judgment

The leading recent authority on BMDC discipline is Professor Zaheer Al-Amin v Bangladesh, Writ Petition No 15724 of 2022, decided by the High Court Division on 19 November 2023. The BMDC had suspended a surgeon's registration for one year after finding that, having obtained written consent for surgery on the left parotid gland, he operated first on the right side without consent and then on the left. The court discharged the Rule: it held that judicial review of a disciplinary penalty does not reopen the merits, that the doctor had been given repeated opportunities to answer the complaint, and that the suspension was not shockingly disproportionate.[8]

Two further points from the judgment matter in practice. First, the court observed that while section 23 empowers the Council to cancel registration, the Act prescribes no detailed procedure and does not expressly provide for suspension, so the BMDC must observe natural justice to make its orders stand. Second, a writ filed while the doctor's statutory appeal to the Government under section 24 was pending was held not maintainable.[8] Complainants should therefore insist on a properly documented hearing, which is what protects a sanction from later challenge.

The BMDC's record

The Council's enforcement record is thin. Netra News reported in July 2026 that fewer than 200 complaints were logged nationwide between 2006 and 2026 and about 140 decided; that over nearly two decades no licence was permanently cancelled, 41 doctors in 28 cases were temporarily suspended and 18 received warnings; and that 52 cases involving 66 doctors remained unresolved.[9] Decisions have accelerated in 2026: in March 2026 the BMDC suspended two doctors for six months each in the Ayan Ahmed case and two doctors for two years each, and a third for six months, in the Ahnaf Tahmid case.[9] A BMDC complaint is necessary for professional accountability, but it does not produce compensation.

Writ petitions and compensation in the High Court Division

The writ jurisdiction under article 102 of the Constitution has become the most visible route for medical negligence Bangladesh families who want an independent inquiry and compensation quickly. The petitions usually rely on the right to life in article 32, and the High Court Division has recognised medical negligence in several public interest cases.[10] Of ten medical negligence cases one Supreme Court lawyer handled over fifteen years, all were writ petitions, and the relief obtained was usually civil compensation.[9] Our guide to writ petitions in Bangladesh explains the procedure in detail.

Cases that produced compensation orders

In October 2018 the High Court Division disposed of a Rule concerning an eye camp at Chuadanga in March 2018, where patients lost their sight after medicine was applied to their eyes. It ordered Impact Masudul Haque Memorial Hospital and the company that supplied the unregistered, substandard medicine each to pay Tk 5 lakh to every one of the 17 victims, directed lifelong treatment and recorded the formation of a seven-member committee in the health ministry to monitor future medical negligence cases.[11]

Compensation orders do not always survive appeal. After the fire in the coronavirus isolation unit of United Hospital, Gulshan, on 27 May 2020, which killed five people, a High Court Division bench ordered Tk 30 lakh to be paid to each affected family. The Appellate Division stayed the order, and in August 2020 a full bench disposed of the appeal on the basis that a regular writ bench should hear the petitions and make orders according to law.[12] Interim compensation ordered at a preliminary hearing is therefore vulnerable.

Inquiry orders in recent cases

In the Raahib Reza case, a writ petition filed on 11 March 2024 after a death during endoscopy at a Dhaka hospital sought an independent investigation and Tk 10 crore in compensation; the High Court Division issued a Rule and ordered an inquiry the same day. The inquiry report submitted on 19 September 2024 found gross negligence before, during and after the procedure, recorded that the consultant had performed 67 endoscopies that day and attributed gross negligence to the hospital administration as well.[10] The Supreme Court later upheld the BMDC's five-year suspension of the doctor, but the compensation writ remained pending in 2026.[9]

When a writ is the right route

A writ is strongest where state actors are involved, such as a government hospital, the DGHS or the BMDC, where an urgent independent inquiry is needed, or where there is a systemic failure such as an unlicensed facility. It is weaker as a vehicle for assessing individual damages, which the court often leaves to the civil courts, and it is discretionary, so delay and the availability of an alternative remedy can defeat it. Our constitutional and writ litigation practice advises on framing these petitions.

Hospital licensing under the Medical Practice and Private Clinics and Laboratories Ordinance 1982

Private hospitals and clinics are licensed under the Medical Practice and Private Clinics and Laboratories (Regulation) Ordinance 1982 (Ordinance No IV of 1982). Section 8 prohibits anyone from establishing a private clinic without a licence, and section 10 makes the Director-General of Health Services the licensing authority.[4]

Licence conditions

Under section 9 a licence can be granted only if the clinic has proper and hygienic accommodation, at least 80 square feet of floor space per patient, an air-conditioned operation theatre, the essential equipment listed in Schedule B, adequate life-saving and essential medicines, the full-time registered practitioners, nurses and staff listed in Schedule C, and specialists for operation, treatment and supervision.[4] A clinic that operates without these is in breach of its licensing obligations, which can itself be evidence of institutional negligence.

Inspection, cancellation and penalties

The Director-General or an authorised officer may inspect any practitioner's chamber, clinic or laboratory. After inspection, he may cancel a clinic's licence once the owner has been given an opportunity to show cause, and may recommend that the Government debar a practitioner from private practice or close a laboratory. Appeals lie to the Government within 30 days. A clinic owner who breaches the Ordinance faces up to six months' imprisonment, a fine of up to Tk 5,000, or both, and no court may take cognisance except on a written complaint by the Director-General or an authorised officer.[4]

The enforcement gap

The 1982 penalties are low and enforcement is uneven. The DGHS has reported at least 1,027 health facilities operating without a licence, and the DGHS and the health ministry can investigate doctors but cannot suspend or revoke registration themselves; they can only ask the BMDC to act.[9] For a claimant, a licensing breach is valuable evidence and a basis for a complaint to the DGHS, but it is rarely a remedy in itself.

Evidence and expert opinion in medical negligence Bangladesh claims

Every route depends on the same evidence, and the quality of that evidence is usually settled in the first few days after the event.

Medical records and documents

The core file is the hospital record: admission notes, consent forms, operation and anaesthesia notes, nursing and ICU charts, prescriptions, test reports, bills and the discharge summary or death certificate. Request copies in writing at once, keep proof of the request and photograph any documents already in the family's hands. A refusal or delay in releasing records should itself be put on record, because it supports an application to a court or inquiry committee for production.

Post-mortem and inquiry reports

Where a patient has died, the post-mortem is often decisive. In the Ahnaf Tahmid case, the pathologist who conducted the post-mortem described the death as gross medical negligence, and that finding underpinned the later BMDC sanctions.[9] Inquiry reports ordered by the High Court Division or the DGHS, such as the Raahib Reza report, carry similar weight across all routes.[10]

Expert opinion

Section 45 of the Evidence Act 1872 makes the opinions of persons specially skilled in science relevant where the court has to form an opinion on a scientific point.[7] Breach and causation in a negligence case are exactly such points. An independent specialist in the same field should be asked two questions: whether the care fell below the standard of a reasonably competent practitioner, and whether that failure, rather than the underlying illness, caused the harm. Finding a willing expert is often the hardest part of the case, and early engagement, including from outside the treating hospital's network, is essential.

Limitation periods for medical negligence Bangladesh claims

Deadlines are the most common reason medical negligence Bangladesh claims fail, and they differ by route.

• Civil suit for personal injury: article 22 of the First Schedule to the Limitation Act 1908 allows one year for compensation for an injury to the person, running from when the injury is committed.[5]
• Fatal Accidents Act suit: article 21 allows one year from the date of the death, for suits by executors, administrators or representatives under the Fatal Accidents Act 1855.[5]
• Consumer complaint: 30 days from the date the cause of action arose under section 60 of the Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009, with a 90-day limit for the charge sheet under section 61.[2]
• BMDC appeal: a practitioner aggrieved by removal from the register has 60 days to appeal to the Government under section 24 of the 2010 Act.[3]
• Licensing appeals: 30 days to the Government against a Director-General's order under the 1982 Ordinance.[4]
• Writ petition: no fixed period, but unexplained delay can defeat a discretionary remedy.

Because the one-year civil periods run from the injury or death rather than from the end of an inquiry, a family should file the civil suit, or at least take advice on it, while the BMDC complaint and criminal investigation are still running.

Draft patient protection law: status in 2025 and 2026

A dedicated law has been promised for more than a decade. A Health Protection Act was first drafted in 2014, and later drafts in 2018, 2023 and 2024 did not reach the statute book.[9] The question for medical negligence Bangladesh claimants in 2026 is not whether reform will come but what shape it will take.

The 2025 ordinance drafts

In October 2025 the interim government's health ministry, following the Health Sector Reform Commission's recommendations, released two drafts: a Healthcare Workers and Institutions Protection Ordinance 2025 and a Patient Protection and Redress Ordinance 2025.[13] The patient draft would have required providers to review and document serious unexpected incidents such as wrong-patient or wrong-site surgery, retained instruments and serious medication errors; treated ordinary negligence as a matter for civil remedies and professional discipline rather than crime; reserved criminal liability for wilful harm, fraud and gross negligence, with up to ten years or a Tk 10 lakh fine for wilful negligence; and created tribunals chaired by a District and Sessions Judge sitting with two independent medical experts and a patient rights representative.[13]

The draft also proposed a one-year period for filing from the date the patient or victim became aware of the incident, encouraged settlement through compensation, corrective measures or apology, and preserved the BMDC's disciplinary jurisdiction.[13] The companion workers' draft proposed up to five years' imprisonment for assaulting a health worker.[13] Neither draft is law, and nothing in either currently binds a court.

The 2026 drafting committee

After the February 2026 elections, the elected government restarted the process. In June 2026 the Health Services Division of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare formed a high-level committee, chaired by the Additional Secretary (Hospital) and including a representative of the Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division, to prepare a Health Protection Act, consult stakeholders and submit a draft within 20 working days.[14] As at 20 October 2026 we have found no record of a bill being passed, so the existing routes described in this guide remain the only ones available. Claimants should not delay filing in the hope of a future tribunal.

Choosing the right route: a practical sequence

Most serious cases need more than one route. The following sequence reflects how we prepare medical negligence Bangladesh claims from the first days after the event.

Swipe or scroll →

The table below compares the routes side by side. On a phone, scroll it sideways.

For a family that has lost a relative in a private hospital, a typical combination is a police case and post-mortem in the first days, a consumer complaint within 30 days, a BMDC complaint with the post-mortem and an expert report, and a civil suit or writ petition for compensation within the year. For a surviving patient of a private clinic, a section 66 consumer civil suit or a tort claim, supported by a BMDC complaint, is often the more efficient pairing. A clear legal notice demanding preservation of records should go out early in either case. Our consumer protection practice advises on the consumer and civil routes.

Guidance for hospitals and practitioners

The same framework creates exposure for providers, and the best defence is built before any complaint arrives.

• Licensing and staffing: keep the clinic licence current and meet the accommodation, equipment and staffing conditions in the 1982 Ordinance, because a licensing breach is the first thing a claimant will look for.[4]
• Registration: confirm that every practitioner holds current BMDC registration; the BMDC acknowledged in 2024 that at least 36,000 doctors were practising without valid registration.[9]
• Consent: record procedure-specific written consent, and do not extend an operation beyond what was consented to except in a genuine emergency, as the Zaheer Al-Amin case shows.[8]
• Records and incident review: keep complete, contemporaneous records and review serious incidents promptly; this is what the 2025 patient draft would have made mandatory, and it is good practice now.[13]
• Response to complaints: answer BMDC and DGHS notices fully and within time, preserve records once a complaint is threatened, and take advice before any public statement.

Health technology providers face related questions on records and remote care; see our analyses of patient data in the cloud and telemedicine platforms in Bangladesh.

What to watch in 2026 and beyond

Three developments will shape medical negligence Bangladesh law over the next year. First, the Health Protection Act now being drafted by the Health Services Division will show whether the elected government adopts the 2025 model of specialist tribunals and a civil-first approach to ordinary negligence.[13] [14] Second, the BMDC's 2026 decisions in long-running cases suggest a more active Council, which will be tested by the backlog of unresolved complaints.[9] Third, pending compensation writs, including the Raahib Reza petition, may produce final High Court Division judgments that settle how compensation is assessed.

Until a dedicated statute is in force, results depend on acting early, choosing the right combination of routes and building the medical evidence properly. If you are dealing with a suspected case of medical negligence, as a patient, a family or a provider, contact TRW for an early review of your position and deadlines.

Frequently asked questions

Is there a specific medical negligence law in Bangladesh?

No. Claims are brought under the common law of tort, the Fatal Accidents Act 1855, the Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009, the Penal Code 1860, the BMDC Act 2010 and the writ jurisdiction. A Patient Protection and Redress Ordinance was drafted in 2025 and a Health Protection Act is being drafted in 2026, but neither is law.[13] [14]

Can I file a consumer complaint against a hospital for negligent treatment?

Yes, if the treatment was paid for. Health services provided for a price are a "service" under the Consumer Rights Protection Act 2009, and section 53 punishes negligence causing loss, harm to health or death with up to three years, a fine of up to Tk 2 lakh, or both. Free services are excluded.[2]

How long do I have to make a consumer complaint?

Thirty days from the date the cause of action arose. A complaint filed later is not accepted.[2]

What is the time limit for a civil compensation claim?

Generally one year from the injury for a personal injury claim, and one year from the death for a suit under the Fatal Accidents Act 1855.[5]

What is the punishment for causing death by medical negligence?

Section 304A of the Penal Code provides for imprisonment of up to five years, a fine, or both, for causing death by a rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide.[1]

Can the BMDC award compensation to a patient?

No. The BMDC's power is disciplinary: it can cancel or suspend a practitioner's registration. Compensation must be sought through the civil courts, a consumer civil suit or a writ petition.[3] [9]

Can a doctor challenge a BMDC suspension?

A practitioner removed from the register may appeal to the Government within 60 days under section 24 of the 2010 Act. In Zaheer Al-Amin v Bangladesh the High Court Division held a writ filed while that appeal was pending not maintainable and upheld a one-year suspension.[3] [8]

Does the High Court Division award compensation for medical negligence?

It can. In the 2018 Chuadanga eye camp case it ordered a hospital and a medicine supplier each to pay Tk 5 lakh to every victim, but interim compensation orders, such as the 2020 United Hospital fire order, have been stayed on appeal.[11] [12]

Who licenses private hospitals and clinics?

The Director-General of Health Services under the Medical Practice and Private Clinics and Laboratories (Regulation) Ordinance 1982, which also allows the licence to be cancelled after a show-cause opportunity.[4]

Do I need an expert opinion to prove negligence?

In practice, yes. Breach of the standard of care and causation are scientific questions, and section 45 of the Evidence Act 1872 makes the opinion of a specially skilled expert relevant on them.[7]