1. Home
  2. Hearings and decisions
  3. Medical practitioners tribunals
  4. Dr Mohammed CHAUDHRY Apr 23

Dr Mohammed CHAUDHRY

Medical practitioners tribunal – New Hearing scheduled
Outcome on impairment
Hearing not yet held
Summary of outcome
Hearing not yet held
Type of case
Hearing date from
04 Mar 2024
Hearing date to
08 Mar 2024
Non-sitting day: 1 and 8 May 2023. Hearing adjourned part-heard. Previously sat: 24 April - 12 May, 15 May 2023 and 5 - 9 February 2024. Will also sit: 11-15 March 2024.
Location of hearing
Area of practice
Croydon, Westminster

Pre hearing information


The tribunal will inquire into the allegation that, between October and November 2019, via social media, Dr Chaudhry offered to supply illegal drugs and encouraged another person to take illegal drugs.

It is separately alleged that, between April 2020 and July 2021, Dr Chaudhry failed to provide good clinical care to Patient A. It is alleged that Dr Chaudhry recorded misleading information in Patient A’s medical records and that this was dishonest.

It is also alleged that on 18 November 2020, Dr Chaudhry allowed a £1,000 treatment prize giveaway to be offered on social media.

It is further alleged that between November 2020 and December 2020, Dr Chaudhry knowingly provided untrue information on his website about having completed his junior doctor training programme.



This reflects the allegation as it stands at the start of the hearing. The allegation may be amended as the hearing proceeds and when findings of fact are made by the tribunal.


All decisions are published online within 28 days of the conclusion of the hearing.


If you're a journalist and need up to date information about the allegation throughout the course of the hearing, please contact our press office at pressoffice@mpts-uk.org or call 0161 250 6868.

Private hearings

In accordance with Rule 41(2) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004, the tribunal may decide to exclude the public from the proceedings or any part of the proceedings, where they consider that the circumstances of the case outweigh the public interest in holding the hearing in public.