Mukesh Pariyani first brought his daughter, Tanvi, to the AIIMS Delhi OPD on 10 October 2012. She was a small child with a complex congenital heart condition diagnosed as ventricular septal defect with pulmonary atresia. Over the next year, she was moved from one department to another while initial tests were completed.
In 2014, the family was referred to cardiac surgeon Dr Sachin Talwar. According to Mukesh, the doctor asked him to deposit money and blood for the planned surgery. He deposited both on 4 April 2014. A hospital document from that period recommended “unifocalisation and conduit” surgery at an estimated cost of roughly ₹1.2 lakh. A date was fixed for 2 September 2015. When the father arrived he was told the operation would take place after Diwali. The date kept shifting.
Mukesh filed a complaint with the Prime Minister’s Office. He was called back to the hospital. He alleges that the doctor then refused to proceed with the surgery until the complaint was withdrawn. Further tests followed in 2018. In 2023, the family returned to AIIMS once more. In 2025, another complaint was filed. On 28 July 2025, they were summoned again, but the doctor was on leave. Later they were told the child could be managed with medicines.
On 9th February this year, Mukesh filed yet another complaint. Tests continued. The surgery still did not take place. In late August, Tanvi was admitted for evaluation of a possible heart-lung transplant because her disease had advanced. On the morning of 1st September, she developed severe cyanosis, her oxygen saturation fell to 48%, and she suffered a hypoxic spell followed by cardiac arrest. She was declared dead at 5:06 am. She was 15 years old.
AIIMS has stated that detailed evaluations in 2013 and later years led the treating team to conclude by 2017 that corrective surgery was not feasible because of the complexity of her cardiac anatomy. The hospital has constituted an internal committee to examine the complete clinical record, investigations, specialist opinions and the circumstances of her death.
More Read
Mukesh’s question remains unchanged. If surgery was recommended and money and blood were accepted in 2014, why was the operation never performed in the years that followed. He wants a clear account of every decision taken between 2012 and 2026 and an answer to whether timely surgery could have altered the outcome. The committee’s findings will determine whether the long sequence of postponed dates and repeated tests is explained by medical judgment or by administrative failure. Until that account is made public, the father’s twelve-year wait and his daughter’s death stand as a stark record of a treatment process that never reached the operation theatre.
