Sunil Mushtaq

Introduction

Sunil Mushtaq is a registered adult nurse from Exeter who was struck off the Nursing and Midwifery Council register on 18 March 2026, after the regulator’s Fitness to Practise Committee found his fitness to practise impaired by a criminal conviction for sexually assaulting a patient. The conviction was handed down at Exeter Crown Court on 21 March 2025, for an offence “committed in October 2022 while he was the agency nurse caring for the patient in the emergency department” of the Royal Devon University Hospital. He received an 18-month suspended prison sentence and is on the Sex Offenders’ Register for ten years. This page confines itself to what that record — a conviction, a sentence, a regulatory determination — actually shows.

Background Information

The determination identifies Mushtaq only through his profession and his registration: a “registered adult nurse from Exeter”, holding NMC PIN 21F0086O. It records no date of birth, no training or qualification history, no prior regulatory record — good or bad — and no employment history beyond his agency work. What is known is that on 10 October 2022 he was on duty in the Emergency Department of the Royal Devon University Hospital as an agency nurse, placed there to cover clinical need rather than employed by the hospital directly. The record shows nothing about him outside the determination.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated vs. alleged. Sunil Mushtaq’s conviction is a matter of court record; the agreed facts were admitted in full before the NMC panel. The conviction and the panel’s impairment finding rest on that record.

The charge the NMC brought stated the foundation of the case in one sentence: “That, as a Registered Nurse, Mr Mushtaq was convicted at Exeter Crown Court on 21 March 2025 of Sexual Assault upon a Female.”

The agreed facts before the panel set out what lay behind it: “while working as an agency nurse in the Emergency Department of the Royal Devon University Hospital on 10 October 2022, he repeatedly entered a patient’s cubicle when her partner was not present and sexually assaulted her while purporting to attend to her cannula.” Each element of that account matters: the patient was someone he was caring for; he returned to the cubicle again and again, timing his entries for moments when her partner was absent; and the clinical task itself was the pretext.

He was sentenced on 12 May 2025 to “18 months’ imprisonment suspended for 18 months”, with “180 hours of unpaid work and 30 rehabilitation activity days”. He is “subject to the Sex Offenders’ Register for ten years and barring by the DBS”.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The determination records no public controversy in the everyday sense — no statements from the hospital trust, no press coverage, no campaigns. What it records is the regulator’s response, and that response was unambiguous. The case was “disposed of by Consensual Panel Determination, with full admissions to the charge”: a disposal agreed between Mushtaq and the NMC in which the charge was admitted in full rather than contested.

The panel “accepted the Consensual Panel Determination agreed between Mr Mushtaq and the NMC” and found his “fitness to practise impaired by reason of his conviction”. It agreed with the parties that the conviction “concerned sexual misconduct against a patient who he was caring for” and “was at the higher end of the spectrum of seriousness”, and that a striking-off order was “the only appropriate and proportionate sanction to protect the public, maintain public confidence in the profession, and uphold professional standards”.

The panel set out its aggravating factors in the determination’s own words: “Abuse of a position of trust in that Mr Mushtaq was providing care to a patient at the time.” “Psychological and emotional harm caused to the patient.” “Continuing nature of the assault in that Mr Mushtaq repeatedly entered the patient’s cubicle to sexually assault her.” “Premeditated behaviour in that Mr Mushtaq committed the offence when the patient’s partner was not present.” And, finally, that “Mr Mushtaq has to comply with the requirements of the sex offenders’ register for a period of ten years.”

That list is the closest thing this record offers to a public verdict: a regulator stating that a nurse who sexually assaults the patient he is caring for cannot remain on the register.

Current Status

Mushtaq was struck off on 18 March 2026, the decision date of the determination. The explainer accompanying it sets out what that means: “Being struck off (the regulator calls this “erasure”) removes the practitioner from the register.” “They are no longer permitted to practise this profession in the UK.” Nor is erasure a fixed-term penalty: “Erasure can be reviewed after a minimum of five years, but is otherwise indefinite.”

One consequence is still in motion: “An interim suspension order of 18 months was imposed pending appeal.” The interim order holds him off the register while any appeal runs; the record does not say whether one has been filed. The criminal side of the case is not in doubt: the suspended sentence, the unpaid work, the rehabilitation days, ten years of registration, and the DBS bar all stand as imposed by the Crown Court.

Impact on Their Career/Life

On the record as it stands, Mushtaq’s career in UK nursing is finished. The striking-off order is indefinite by default, the earliest possible review lies five years ahead, and the panel called striking off the only appropriate and proportionate sanction — nothing in the determination points to an early return.

The consequences also reach past nursing. Barring by the DBS operates independently of the nursing register and surfaces in checks for work involving vulnerable people. The ten-year registration was itself listed as an aggravating factor. The suspended sentence means he is not in prison, but the unpaid work and rehabilitation days remain obligations attached to his liberty.

The record then stops. It does not say where Mushtaq is now, whether he has appealed, or whether any other body has acted against him. What it does say is enough for the purpose it serves: a nurse was convicted of sexually assaulting a patient in the emergency department, the regulator found the conviction placed him at the higher end of the spectrum of seriousness, and it erased him. This page, like the record it draws on, ends there.