Nazlin Umar’s Daughter Accuses Surgeon, MP Shah Hospital of Unprocedurally Drilling Her Ovaries, Ruining Her Chances of Getting Pregnant

The daughter of former presidential candidate Nazlin Umar has delivered an explosive account before the High Court, accusing MP Shah Hospital and two doctors of secretly drilling her ovaries during what had been consented to as a routine laparoscopic appendectomy, allegedly destroying her ability to conceive.

Najda Begum Khan has sued the private hospital, consultant surgeon Dr Navin Raina and Dr Dennis Nyambane, alongside the Medical Practitioners and Dentists Board, claiming medical negligence, malpractice and gross violation of her constitutional rights.

In pleadings filed at the High Court, Khan says she was admitted to MP Shah Hospital in July 2018 with severe abdominal pain and symptoms linked to a urinary tract infection.

Doctors diagnosed appendicitis and recommended emergency surgery.

She maintains that despite conflicting radiological reports that pointed to ovarian cysts and other gynecological concerns, she was assured that only her appendix would be addressed if found inflamed.

According to court documents, that assurance was allegedly broken.

Khan now claims that once she was under anesthesia, the procedure went beyond the agreed appendectomy. She accuses the surgical team of performing ovarian drilling and removing cysts without her knowledge or consent.

Ovarian drilling is a procedure historically used in managing certain fertility conditions, but she contends it was carried out unprocedurally, without a gynecological surgeon present and contrary to prior medical advice.

Her mother, Nazlin Umar, testified that hospital video footage shows activity consistent with ovarian intervention after the appendix had already been removed.

She told the court that no consent had been given for any procedure involving her daughter’s ovaries and described the alleged actions as reckless and life altering.

The suit alleges that the procedure extensively damaged Khan’s ovaries, leading to the destruction of her eggs and permanently denying her the chance to bear children. She describes the outcome as a devastating blow that has strained her marriage and subjected her to emotional trauma, humiliation and social stigma.

In addition to the contested surgery, Khan claims she developed life threatening sepsis due to what she terms mismanagement and incorrect antibiotic prescriptions.

She alleges she was discharged prematurely despite heavy bleeding, a persistent urinary tract infection and inability to walk unassisted.

The hospital is further accused of prescribing medication to which laboratory results had already shown resistance.

Court papers state that she was later rushed back to the same facility as an emergency case with high fever and severe pain, which she attributes to wrong diagnosis, rushed discharge and negligent post operative care.

She has asked the court to declare the hospital vicariously liable for the actions of its doctors and to award general and exemplary damages for pain, suffering, psychological distress and loss of fertility.

Nazlin Umar and daughter Najda Begum Khan

She is also seeking compensation for future medical expenses and has called for an audit of surgeries conducted by the doctors in question, with the findings to be filed in court.

The Medical Practitioners and Dentists Board has also been drawn into the dispute. Khan alleges that her complaint before its Preliminary Inquiry Committee has not been heard, accusing the regulator of failing to act decisively.

The defence has questioned the scope of the consent forms signed prior to surgery and the authenticity and interpretation of the alleged theatre footage.

Lawyers for the hospital are expected to argue that the procedure fell within acceptable medical standards and that any additional interventions were clinically justified.

The case now sets the stage for a bruising courtroom battle that will probe the boundaries of surgical consent, the standard of care in private hospitals and the deeply personal consequences when trust in the operating theatre is said to have been shattered.

For Khan and her family, the stakes are not merely financial.

At the heart of the lawsuit is a claim that a moment under anesthesia cost her a future she had long envisioned.