A doctor who was struck off for inappropriately touching patients at hospitals in Oxford and Cambridge has failed to get reinstated to the medical register.
Anandagopal Srinivasan was a junior doctor in his first year of practice when he twice touched the woman, known as Patient B, during an examination at the John Radcliffe Hospital’s accident and emergency department in 2016.
The incident reduced the patient to tears and was witnessed by her friend, who was there to translate for the Romanian national.
READ MORE: Doctor cleared of sex assault at the John Radcliffe Hospital
That came two years after he lifted a female patient’s top at Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge, and stared at her naked breasts. He was in his final year of medical school at the time.
He was cleared by an Oxford jury at a retrial in 2019 of sexually assaulting the patient at the John Radcliffe. During his trial at the city’s crown court, he maintained that the examination was routine and the alleged victim had been ‘mistaken’ about what happened. Srinivasan had already been cleared of the alleged Cambridge assault at a trial in 2018.
Despite being cleared by a jury in the criminal courts, a misconduct tribunal of the General Medical Council found that the two allegations were proved. The regulator assesses allegations on a lower standard of proof than the criminal courts, looking at whether it is more likely than not that an allegation happened.
The GMC tribunal struck him off, finding that there was ‘clear and cogent evidence’ that the first allegation took place. Srinivasan’s evidence regarding the second allegation was ‘not persuasive’, the tribunal said.
The second, more serious allegation was taken as an ‘escalation’ in the junior doctor’s behaviour, as it followed a police investigation into the first incident.
READ MORE: Community order for man who stole ambulance uniform and gear
Srinivasan appealed the tribunal’s decision to the High Court, arguing that the panel’s findings of fact were wrong and ‘irrational’. Its decision to ban him from working as a doctor was ‘wrong and unfair’ as it was based on incorrect findings of fact, he claimed.
But that appeal was thrown out by Mr Justice Sweeting.
In a published judgement, the High Court judge said: “The tribunal was satisfied that the events happened as described by the individual patients having considered each allegation and patient separately.”
He added: “The findings, in my judgement, accord with the evidence.”
Mr Justice Sweeting’s judgement noted that Srinivasan had always argued that the accounts given by both patients who accused him of misconduct were ‘inaccurate and that no sexual misconduct occurred’.
Read more from this author
This story was written by Tom Seaward. He joined the team in 2021 as Oxfordshire's court and crime reporter.
To get in touch with him email: Tom.Seaward@newsquest.co.uk
Follow him on Twitter: @t_seaward
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article