Bangladesh has a good healthcare network covering both rural and urban areas where the public sector encompasses about 3,976 healthcare facilities while 975 privately-run hospitals/clinics. Despite recent developments in the Bangladesh healthcare sector, there is still great concern about the quality of healthcare services in the country. Considering this, an investigation was carried out in different hospitals, clinics, and diagnostic centers of Khulna City Corporation (KCC) to find out the present hydro-chemical conditions of drinking water. To explore the consumption status and measure the suitability of water samples by Water Quality Index (WQI) and comparison with recommended standards were also performed. Hence, twenty-five water samples were collected and their major cations and anions were analyzed for hydro-chemical characterization. The result of the study shows that the pH ranges from a minimum 6.5 to a maximum of 7.8; EC ranges from 33 μS/cm to 1806 μS/cm; TDS ranges from 11 mg/l to 1086 mg/l. Moreover, Sodium ranges from 34.987 to 856.75 mg/l; chloride ranges from 22.7 to 774 mg/l whereas calcium and magnesium range from 8.0468 to 41; .359 mg/l and 2.1305 to 15.564 mg/l respectively. Variation of bicarbonate from 81 to 706.4 ppm indicates that some of the water samples are dominated by alkali carbonate which has altered the concentration of sodium and chloride into fresh water. The correlation matrix recognizes strong and moderate correlations among the most water quality parameter. Gibbs diagram for cations shows that nearly 52% of the samples water falls under the evaporation dominance field and 4% of the samples follow the rock–water dominance field 44% fall under precipitation dominance. Accordingly, 60 % of the samples fall under evaporation dominance, 4% rock-water dominance fields and 36% of samples fw the precipitation dominance respectively. Except few, most samples did not meet Bangladesh and WHO drinking water quality standards. The WQI value insights that almost 28% of the sample were ranked as “Good”, 68% were ranked as “Poor” while 4% were ranked as “Extremely Poor”. It indicates a possible threat to the patient, staff, and consumer.