WhatsApp chats point to ‘patient poaching ’by city doctor: HC refuses to quash FIR
   Date :01-Apr-2026

WhatsApp chats point to patient poaching by city docto
 
 
 
Staff Reporter :
 
IN A case that puts medical ethics under sharp scrutiny, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has refused to grant relief to a doctor accused of using leaked patient data to grow his practice. The court was told that an employee from another doctor’s clinic was secretly sharing patient details, leading to what was described as “patient poaching.” WhatsApp chats and call records presented during the hearing showed regular communication and supported the allegations. Taking note of this material, Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke dismissed the plea filed by Dr Utpal Bandhekar, who had sought to quash the FIR registered at Dhantoli Police Station under charges of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and under the Information Technology Act. The complaint was filed by Dr Nilesh Pund, who runs a hair transplant clinic in Nagpur.
 
He alleged that one of his clinic employees secretly shared patient details with Dr Bandhekar and another person. The employee also allegedly diverted patients to both of them and kept part of the money. During the investigation, police found WhatsApp chats and call records showing regular contact between the accused doctor and the clinic employee. The chats indicated that patient information was shared and money was exchanged in return.
 
The High Court noted that while the offence of criminal breach of trust by a clerk or servant may not directly apply to Dr Bandhekar, there is enough material to show his involvement in cheating. The court observed that the doctor’s actions went beyond professionalmisconductandshowedclear intention fromthe beginning to gain financially by using patient data. It alsostressedthatdoctorsareexpected to follow medical ethics and not lure patients from other practitioners. The court said that at this stage, there is sufficient evidence to proceed with the case and it cannot be quashed under its powers. Accordingly, the application was rejected, and the criminal case against the doctor will continue.