Suspended after not reporting cannabis driving conviction

The GPhC has suspended a pharmacist who failed to report a drug driving conviction and lied about the incident twice.

The GPhC said he had shown “repeated dishonest conduct”

A pharmacist has been suspended for failing to report a driving conviction after he was caught driving under the influence of cannabis.

Abbas Zulfikar Karimjee, registration number 2236253, was “convicted at Bolton Magistrates’ Court” for driving whilst having a “proportion of a controlled drug, namely cannabis” in his blood, which “exceeded the specified limit”.

The registrant then “failed to declare the conviction” to the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) “within 7 days as required”, the GPhC fitness-to-practise committee heard on June 8-10.

Read more: Pharmacist warned after failing to record 300 flu vaccines

According to the hearing document, the committee acknowledged that “although there was a potential risk to the public by the registrant’s actions”, it “did not relate to his clinical practice”.

His behaviour “had not put patients at risk and there is no evidence patient safety was compromised”, it said.

“Repeated failures”

But the regulator noted that he had shown “repeated dishonest conduct” and “repeated failures to provide accurate information to the council over a prolonged period of time”.

The registrant had “several opportunities provided to correct the information” and this “was not an isolated incident”.

Read more: Pharmacist warned for dispensing husband’s text message scripts

On September 22 2023, the registrant “was stopped by the police whilst driving his vehicle” on the A666 in Bolton.

Police “noticed a strong smell of cannabis coming from the car” and so conducted a “roadside drugs test… which tested positive for cannabis”.

At Bolton police station “two blood samples were obtained for analysis” and “showed that the amount of cannabis in his system was 3.2ug, above the prescribed limit of 2ug”.

The registrant, a trainee pharmacist at the time of the offence, “pleaded guilty on 26 March 2024”, was “disqualified from driving for 12 months” and also ordered to pay a penalty fine.

Read more: Superintendent warned after drugs ‘fell through ceiling’

Registered pharmacists and trainee pharmacists are required to notify the registrar in writing if they are convicted of any criminal offence within seven days of the conviction occurring, but the council concluded that “no record could be found of receiving any communication from the registrant regarding his conviction”.

On December 11 2023, the registrant answered “no” to a question asking whether he was “currently under investigation” by a “criminal enforcement authority”, when completing a registration application to be a pharmacist.

The committee also found on November 18 2024, the registrant had responded “yes” when asked if he had “previously been convicted or cautioned for a criminal offence” whilst completing a fitness for practise declaration.

It noted that he then “indicated that he had previously informed the council of this conviction”.

Remorse

The registrant “expressed remorse”, “apologised for his conduct” and also “made full admissions in relation to his dishonesty”.

The regulator also noted that the misconduct was “directed towards the council” and was related to information which the GPhC “required in order to properly discharge its statutory functions”

Read more: Pharmacy tech warned for lying to employers about qualification

It also recognised there was a “degree of deliberate action”.

The committee said that there was “a failure to inform the council of the criminal conviction and two incidences of dishonesty”.

These acts were “serious, repeated and were intended to mislead the council” and so amounted to misconduct.

Brought profession “into disrepute”

His conduct had “posed a potential risk to patients and the public, had brought the profession of pharmacy into disrepute and had breached one of the fundamental principles of the profession”, according to the regulator.

It found “current fitness to practise to be impaired on public interest grounds”, but “not impaired on public protection grounds”.

The registrant was given a suspension “for a period of four months”.

Read the determination in full here.

Alex Cooke

Read more by Alex Cooke

Alex Cooke joined C+D in January 2026. She has previously worked as a reporter for Newsquest and The Sun. She graduated with an MA in Journalism from City, University of London in 2024.

Latest from Regulation

More from News