A Bradford psychiatrist who diagnosed a woman as psychotic after chatting to her through a window has been found guilty of abusing his position.

But a General Medical Council disciplinary committee found Doctor Sasi Bhusan Mahapatra not guilty of serious professional misconduct.

Dr Mahapatra, of Woodlands Drive, Apperley Bridge, told solicitors the woman was mentally ill after being asked to provide evidence in divorce proceedings, it was stated at the hearing in London. He denied serious professional misconduct when he appeared before the committee.

The doctor admitted that he failed to physically examine the woman, referred to only as Mrs A at the hearing, or take a medical history and that he wrote to the husband's solicitor saying she was suffering from paranoid psychosis.

But he denied he discussed her medical history with her husband's solicitors, her church minister or her brother.

Earlier, Irena Ray-Crosby, for the GMC, said the woman's husband had become convinced that his wife was suffering from mental illness and the family GP asked Dr Mahapatra to assess Mrs A's mental state.

Announcing the committee's decision yesterday, Douglas Gentleman told Dr Mahapatra that it had been a difficult and unusual case.

He had been found guilty of irresponsible actions and abusing his professional position on more than one occasion, including during a meeting with an elder at Mrs A's church, during an appointment in January 1994.

He had also written to solicitors acting for Mr A giving information on her mental state without making it clear that he had not examined her and that his conclusions were based solely or largely on information obtained from Mr A and his sons.

Mr Gentleman said: "You were therefore not in a position to make any conclusions about her mental health and the committee has found that your actions were irresponsible and an abuse of your professional position.

"You failed to have proper regard for the interests of Mrs A and as a result she has suffered considerable distress."

The committee accepted that Dr Mahapatra had wanted to help in a difficult situation and that these matters constituted an isolated episode in his professional career.

Mr Gentleman said: "Having given very careful consideration to all aspects of the case the committee is not satisfied that the facts found proved against you amount to serious professional misconduct."

After the hearing, Mrs A said: "I never wanted this doctor to get struck off. We are all allowed one mistake in our lives, aren't we?"