Mamta Dogra cocks back her head and laughs. But she’s got nothing to giggle about now – as her boss at Medibank learns she slammed a little boy’s head into a sink

A suburban wife sentenced this week for slamming a boy’s head into a bathroom sink is now in jeopardy of being sacked by Medibank. 

The health insurance giant broke its silence over employee Mamta Dogra’s actions on Friday after Daily Mail Australia revealed the Sydney woman, 47, had been sentenced for assaulting a small boy – but still sought to work with children. 

In a statement, a Medibank spokeswoman said that it takes such cases ‘very seriously and acts accordingly and quickly’. 

It is understood Dogra – who has since moved to Adelaide to work for the company – faces suspension over her assault convictions, pending an internal investigation, and could face termination.

Dogra sought to fight a conviction for her crimes at Sydney’s Downing Centre Local Court because she might then fail criminal and working-with-children checks.

Her lawyer Anthony O’Dea this week submitted to the court references that said she was ‘loving, kind and generous’.

That submission rejected by Magistrate Glenn Bartley as ‘out of touch with reality’. 

Mamta Dogra, who was convicted of slamming a little boy’s head into a bathroom sink and telling him to ‘shut up’ as blood poured down his face, may have already been suspended from her Medibank job

The 47-year-old Medibank consultant could face ultimate termination as the health insurance giant told Daily Mail Australia it takes such cases 'very seriously and acts accordingly and quickly'

The 47-year-old Medibank consultant could face ultimate termination as the health insurance giant told Daily Mail Australia it takes such cases ‘very seriously and acts accordingly and quickly’

Dogra emigrated from India to Australia in 2004 to marry an Indian Australian and committed the most serious assault in 2018.

Mr O’Dea said Dogra faced losing her job if she could not pass police background and working-with-children checks required of her by Medibank as a consultant whose clients were accompanied by children.

Magistrate Glenn Bartley refused, saying that Dogra had ‘slammed [the six-year-old boy’s] head into a sink causing a laceration’ which bled profusely while telling him to ‘shut up’ and refusing to call an ambulance.

Now Medibank Australia has revealed that in cases such as Dogra’s, the employee faces immediate suspension and possible sacking.

In a statement to Daily Mail Australia, Medibank said it was ‘unable to comment on specific employees’, but ‘we can say that we take instances such as this very seriously and act accordingly and quickly’. 

READ MORE: Mamta Dogra claims she was  ‘loving’ slammed by judge

Mamta Dogra’s claims she was ‘kind’ and ‘generous’ were rejected in judgment 

‘This includes standing an employee down immediately to investigate any allegations of misconduct or any other serious matter – the outcome of which may include termination of employment. 

‘The Working with Children Check is a screening process for assessing or re-assessing people who work with or care for children.’

The medical insurer said it completed ‘police background checks for all our employees before they commence work with us’.

The Downing Centre Local Court heard on Tuesday that prior to her offending, Dogra had a clean record, something that Magistrate Bartley said he was taking into account when sentencing her.

While expressing some frustration that sentencing options such as community supervision were denied him because Dogra had moved interstate, he said community deterrence ‘was a major consideration’.

‘Young children cannot protect themselves from the actions of adults… where that protective trust is abused,’ the magistrate said.

Dogra’s lawyer partially agreed, saying ‘you can’t have people going around … throwing children under sinks and there’s community protection’, but insisted ‘my client is not in that category’.

‘(Character) references found her to be … kind and generous… the community can feel safe that they are not at risk from violence.’

Magistrate Bartley said he would give some of Dogra’s references ‘little weight’ and that  ‘slamming [the boy’s] head into a hard sink scarcely fits that .’

When Mr O’Dea argued that ‘my client is deserving of credit’, the magistrate responded: ‘How? I found her guilty beyond reasonable doubt. 

‘I found beyond reasonable doubt she…. pushed [the boy] into a hard object. I didn’t really accept her as a source of great truth.’

The magistrate also rejected arguments by Dogra that ‘money was tight’, given that at one point she had been represented by three different lawyers. 

‘This case has gone on for a long time… on and on and on and on and on,’ he said.

The magistrate was unable to consider giving Dogra an Intensive Corrections Order, which is in effect a jail sentence served in the community, because she now lives in South Australia, and it requires supervision.

He said on the balance of all the charges she had not passed the threshold required for imposing such an order. 

He imposed a three-year Community Corrections Order upon her and slapped her with fines totaling $17,500.

***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk