BHU Orders Inquiry After Doctor Says Security Took 40 Minutes to Reach OPD Room

VARANASI: Banaras Hindu University has formed a three-member committee to examine a confrontation in the medicine outpatient department after a doctor alleged that students confined and intimidated him while security personnel took about 40 minutes to intervene.

Dr Dheeraj Kishore said around ten students prevented him from leaving a room during Tuesday’s dispute. He questioned how the response took so long when roughly 50 security personnel are assigned to the OPD complex and a control room operates there. In complaints to the vice-chancellor, chief proctor and medical superintendent, he also alleged that a student raised a hand as if to strike him.

The students have given a different account. They said one of them entered the consultation room with a relative when token number 66 was displayed and alleged that the doctor behaved improperly and told him to leave. They also questioned the presence of an outsider directing patients towards a medical shop and asked that CCTV footage be examined. Their complaint alleges that a video of the incident was circulated.

Neither account should be treated as the final version. The inquiry committee, which will include representatives of the proctorial board and IMS, must establish the sequence from video, CCTV, duty rosters and statements from patients and staff who were present. BHU’s chief proctor, Professor Sandeep Pokhariya, said a video supplied by the doctor was being examined and that action would follow against anyone found responsible. A written complaint has also been sent to Lanka police.

The immediate security question is not whether guards were somewhere in the building, but how quickly the control room received the alert, who was dispatched and what prevented access to the room. Staffing numbers can create an illusion of safety if duties, radio communication and escalation rules are unclear.

The clinical setting matters too. OPDs are crowded, patients wait for hours and doctors work under pressure. None of that excuses abuse by staff, obstruction by attendants or collective intimidation. A hospital needs a complaint route that allows a patient or student to challenge behaviour without surrounding a clinician, and it needs a security response that separates people before an argument becomes confinement or assault.

The committee should preserve all original footage and publish a concise factual finding once statements are complete. Selective clips can begin after the confrontation and omit what triggered it. Duty logs should show whether the claimed 40-minute delay is accurate.

This is not a contest in which either doctors or students must be believed as a group. It is a test of institutional procedure. If a patient was treated disrespectfully, that deserves redress. If a doctor was prevented from leaving or threatened, that demands action. Both questions can be investigated at the same time.

BHU hospital serves thousands of people daily. Its credibility depends on patients being heard, staff being safe and security arriving when called. The committee now has to turn competing allegations into a documented timeline and recommend changes that work in the next crowded OPD, not only close the present file.