Nabeela Anjum
Introduction
Nabeela Anjum is a biomedical scientist who was registered with the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) under registration number BS43047. On 18 July 2025, at the end of a substantive hearing that had opened the previous day, a panel of the Health and Care Professions Tribunal Service (HCPTS) directed that she be struck off the register. The case had an unusual shape for a disciplinary hearing: at its centre stood not a clinical failing but two criminal convictions, recorded at Leeds Crown Court on 14 May 2024, for failing to disclose information about terrorism. The panel accepted those convictions and found her fitness to practise impaired on both personal and public grounds.
Background Information
The published record identifies Anjum as a biomedical scientist holding HCPC registration BS43047. The determination window does not name an employer, describe her training or career, or identify the planned attack or any other detail of the criminal case, and this page does not guess at them. MedicWatch — an independent record service that aggregates publicly published decisions of UK healthcare regulators without editorialising their findings — carries her case with erasure as its most recent published outcome, and directs readers to the official HCPC register for her current registration status.
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Criminal convictions, established fact. Anjum’s two convictions at Leeds Crown Court are matters of criminal record, not allegations, and are stated here as facts with court and date. The striking-off that followed is a regulatory consequence: an HCPTS panel, applying the civil standard — the balance of probabilities — to the question of fitness to practise, found it impaired because of those convictions and ordered her removal from the register.
The criminal facts sit at the centre of the case. On 14 May 2024, Anjum was convicted at Leeds Crown Court of two counts of failing to disclose information about terrorism. The convictions concerned her failure to tell police information that she knew or believed could materially assist in preventing a planned terrorist attack. The published record states the offence in those terms and no further: it does not name the planned attack, identify anyone else involved, or describe the criminal proceedings beyond the convictions themselves, and nothing on this page should be read as filling that gap.
The HCPTS panel convened for a substantive hearing on 17 and 18 July 2025 to consider what those convictions meant for her registration. It accepted the convictions and found her fitness to practise impaired on personal and public grounds. The personal limb carried a stark finding: no insight, no remorse, no apology and no remediation. The public limb carried the risk assessment: a real risk of repetition, and grave potential harm to patients and the wider public were she to remain registered.
In aggravation, the panel listed the absence of insight, remorse or apology, the lack of remediation, and service-user harm or potential service-user harm, including serious potential harm to patients and the wider public. Against that picture it worked through sanction and concluded that only removal from the register could protect the public and maintain confidence. No lesser sanction, it found, would be sufficient, and the direction to strike Anjum off followed.
Public Reaction and Consequences
The published record contains no press coverage of the hearing and no public statements from Anjum or any other party. The concrete consequence is the striking-off direction of 18 July 2025 — the most serious sanction the panel could impose, chosen on its express finding that no lesser sanction was sufficient. The aggravating record the panel left — no insight, remorse, apology or remediation, and a real risk of repetition — is the closest the published window comes to explaining why the outcome was erasure rather than a lesser restriction: the regulator judged the risk to patients and the wider public unmanageable within the register. The published window records no appeal and no appeal outcome.
Current Status
Anjum was struck off the HCPC register by the panel’s decision of 18 July 2025. Her MedicWatch profile records erasure as her most recent published outcome, notes her registration status as not yet verified, and directs readers to the official HCPC register for her current position, including whether any appeal has affected the direction. The MedicWatch determination page, updated and last checked on 23 September 2026, continues to point to the HCPC’s own source page and source PDF for the full determination. The published window contains no interim order, no appeal outcome and no reinstatement.
Impact on Their Career/Life
Striking off ended Anjum’s registration and her ability to work as a biomedical scientist in the UK unless a future restoration application succeeds. The case shows how conduct far from the clinic can end a healthcare career: the case for impairment rested on the convictions alone, with no allegation about her day-to-day practice, and the panel treated the failure to pass on information about a planned terrorist attack — untouched by any insight or remediation — as incompatible with remaining on a register that exists to protect the public. Beyond the determination, the published record contains nothing about her circumstances since.