2026:JHHC:5196 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 1067 of 2025 ------ 1. Kamlesh Chopra, wife of late B.K. Chopra, resident of 36 CH Area, Circuit House Area, P.O and P.S. Bistupur, Town- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum. 2. Mrs. Neena Aul, daughter of Late B.K. Chopra, resident of V-7, CP Club, DLF-3, Sector-24, P.O and P.S. Nathupur, District- Gurgaon. 3. Babita Bhutani, daughter of late B.K. Chopra, resident of 1430 B-1, Darbhanga Colony, P.O and P.S. Civil Lines, District- Allahabad (Uttar Pradesh). 4. Rajeev Chopra, son of late Basant Kumar Chopra, resident of 36 CH Area, Circuit House Area, P.O and P.S. Bistupur, Town- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum. . .. Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Director Generalof Police, Project Building, Dhurwa, Ranchi. 2. Jharkhand Armed Police-VI, through Commandant, BMP Jamshedpur, Hata Main Road, South Park, Bistupur, P.O and P.S. Bistupur, District East Singhbhum. ...Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner(s): M/s Shankar Lal Agarwal & Ayushi, Advocates. For the State Mr. Mihir Kunal Ekka, AC to SC-I. ------- 03/20.02.2026: Heard the parties. The amount of compensation is lying with the Registrar General of this Court. The problem is only in respect of disbursement of the amount to two of the petitioners, namely Mrs. Neena Aul daughter of late B.K. Chopra and wife of Sanjeev Aul (petitioner No. 2) and Babita Bhutani daughter of B.K. Chopra and wife of Anuj Bhutani (petitioner No. 3). It has been submitted by the learned counsel Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal that the Registry is not disbursing the share of the petitioners on the ground the surname of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 is not matching. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 got married thus their surname has changed, but it cannot be denied that they are the daughters and legal heirs of late B.K. Chopra, who died in an accident and the amount of compensation as per their share has to be disbursed to them. Thus, the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 being the daughters of the deceased, are also entitled for their share. He lastly submits that the 1. mother of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 (i.e. petitioner No. 1) and their brother ( i.e. petitioner No. 4) are not objecting for disbursement of the amount in favour of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. Considering the aforesaid facts, I direct the Registrar General of this Court to disburse the respective shares of all the petitioners within two weeks after taking an indemnity bond from petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Let a copy of this order be provided to the learned Registrar General of this Court. 20th February, 2026 (ANANDA SEN, J.) Anu-Cp2. Uploaded on: 20.02.2026 2.