New Delhi: The Union Government has clarified that the regulation, licensing, and oversight of hair transplant and cosmetic surgery clinics remain primarily the responsibility of State Governments and Union Territories, with no centralised data maintained on registered clinics, procedures, or adverse events. In a written reply to an unstarred question in the Rajya Sabha today, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare stated that “Health” being a State subject, the primary responsibility for registration and regulation of such clinics, inspections, and handling cases of medical negligence lies with the respective States/UTs.
The question (No. 3618), raised by Rajya Sabha member Ms. Swati Maliwal, sought detailed information on:
(a) The number of registered and operational hair transplant and cosmetic surgery clinics, State-wise;
(b) The authority responsible for licensing and inspections, along with data on procedures conducted (type-wise, year-wise, and State-wise) in the last five years;
(c) The number of adverse events, cases of medical negligence, serious complications, and deaths attributable to cosmetic procedures, year-wise and State-wise in the last five years;
(d) The number of unqualified persons performing invasive procedures and action taken thereon;
(e) Whether national guidelines exist on risk disclosure, consent, pricing, and adverse event reporting; and
(f) Whether the Government proposes to establish a central registry of licensed clinics and practitioners and enforce stricter oversight mechanisms for patient safety.
In her reply, Minister of State for Health and Family Welfare Smt. Anupriya Patel stated that data and details in this regard “are not maintained centrally.” She pointed to the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 (CE Act) and the Clinical Establishments (Central Government) Rules, 2012 (amended in 2018 and 2020), which provide for the registration and regulation of government (except Armed Forces) and private clinical establishments. The Act is currently applicable in 19 States/UTs — Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Jharkhand, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Telangana, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, and the Union Territories of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Chandigarh, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, Jammu & Kashmir, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, and Puducherry
Under the CE Act, clinical establishments must meet minimum standards of services. A district-level registering authority, chaired by the District Collector/District Magistrate, is empowered to impose penalties and even cancel registrations for violations. In States/UTs that have not adopted the CE Act, regulation is handled under respective State laws. Additionally, the professional conduct of all Registered Medical Practitioners is governed by the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. The reply made no mention of any proposal for a national central registry or stricter central oversight mechanisms.
Rising Concerns Over Unlicensed Clinics
The government’s response comes amid growing public and medical concern over the proliferation of unlicensed or poorly regulated hair transplant and cosmetic surgery clinics across India. Media reports have repeatedly highlighted serious risks to patients, including infections, scarring, vision loss, permanent disfigurement, and even deaths linked to procedures performed by unqualified individuals or in non-compliant facilities.
Notable incidents include the deaths of two young engineers in Kanpur last year following hair transplant procedures allegedly conducted by a dental surgeon and technicians lacking proper qualifications. Similar cases have been reported in Chennai (2016), Delhi (2022), and other cities, often involving severe infections, toxic shock, or botched surgeries in salons or unregistered centres.
Medical bodies such as the Indian Association of Dermatologists, Venereologists and Leprologists (IADVL) and the Association of Plastic Surgeons of India (APSI) have repeatedly warned that clinics operating without qualified dermatologists, plastic surgeons, or proper infrastructure pose a “serious threat to community health.” They have flagged complications from lasers (burns and scarring), chemical peels, and hair transplants performed by dentists, technicians, or weekend-certified practitioners. In February 2026, the Tamil Nadu Medical Council issued warnings against unqualified aesthetic procedures, citing the 2022 National Medical Commission guidelines that restrict such invasive work to properly trained registered medical practitioners.
Experts emphasise that hair transplantation is a surgical procedure requiring comprehensive training in cutaneous and follicular science, complication management, and systemic disease diagnosis — training not covered in short certification courses or non-medical setups. Despite these concerns, enforcement remains patchy, with reports of illegal beauty centres and salons advertising medical procedures without licences or hospital tie-ups.
The Ministry’s reply today underscores that patient safety in this booming sector continues to rely on State-level implementation of existing laws rather than any new central regulatory framework or nationwide registry.
References & Acknowledgements:
Official source: Rajya Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3618, answered on 24 March 2026 (Annexure available at https://sansad.in/getFile/annex/270/AU3618_HLMdqb.pdf?source=pqars).
News reports on unlicensed clinic risks drawn from The Hindu, Express Healthcare, The South First, and other verified Indian media outlets (March 2025–March 2026).
