Maharashtra ‘Ghost Pathologist’ Concerns Put Biometric Access In Focus As QCI Seeks Stronger Lab Security

Mumbai, October 13, 2026: Biometric access for pathologists could emerge as a key safeguard against ‘ghost pathologists’ in diagnostic laboratories, after the Quality Council of India (QCI) acknowledged the need to strengthen digital security in pathology report authorisation.

Several instances have been reported in Mumbai, the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) and other parts of Maharashtra where reports were allegedly issued using pathologists’ signatures even when the doctors were based in another city or had died.

Health activist Dr Anan Jaiswal raised the issue in a formal complaint to QCI, seeking mandatory identity-bound authorisation of test reports. In its September 30 response, QCI termed the proposed standard a “legitimate opportunity for improvement”. However, it has not announced any timeline for introducing biometric access.

“The pathologist whose name appears on a report must be the person who actually reviewed and authorised it. Biometric access and verifiable digital records can help prevent the misuse of doctors’ credentials and signatures,” said Dr Jaiswal.

Allegations Of Reports Issued Under Deceased Pathologist’s Name

The issue was highlighted by The Free Press Journal in February 2026, when it reported allegations by the Maharashtra Association of Practising Pathologists and Microbiologists that laboratories in Pune, Mumbai and the MMR had continued issuing reports under a pathologist’s name months after his death in November 2025.

The association also alleged that nearly 8,000 laboratories in Maharashtra were operating without qualified pathologists, prompting demands for a statewide investigation.

In its reply, QCI said credential sharing, using reusable signature images instead of actual authorisation, and signing reports under another pathologist’s name were inconsistent with existing safeguards.

Reports authorised by anyone other than the designated personnel would constitute a non-conformity under existing National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL) criteria.

NABL Outlines Existing Safeguards

NABL said it verifies pathologists’ registration and association with laboratories, including through unannounced assessments. It also issued instructions to assessors on August 6 to strengthen these checks.

However, QCI clarified that NABL is a voluntary accreditation body, not a statutory IT security regulator. Accreditation is subject to annual assessments.

Also Watch:

How To Complain Against A Pathology Laboratory?

Patients can lodge complaints against NABL-accredited laboratories through the Quality Setu portal or by emailing info@nabl.qcin.org. For laboratories that are not NABL-accredited, complaints can be submitted to the district administration or the relevant state health authority for appropriate action.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/