Medical practitioners tribunal – New Hearing scheduled
Outcome on impairment
Hearing not yet held
Summary of outcome
Hearing not yet held
Type of case
Misconduct, Performance
Hearing date from
01 Apr 2019
Hearing date to
02 May 2019
Location of hearing
St James’s Buildings, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ (get directions)
GMC reference number
Area of practice

Pre hearing information


The tribunal will inquire into the allegation that on multiple occasions between the dates of 11 May 2012 and 7 February 2017, Dr Chopra failed to provide good clinical care to 19 patients including by failing to take a sufficiently detailed history, inappropriate prescribing, failing to formulate treatment plans or follow up appointments for patients, failing to review medications, failing to arrange face to face consultations, and that that Dr Chopra’s records of consultation were inadequate.

It is alleged that, by reason of the matters set out above, Dr Chopra’s fitness to practice is impaired by reason of deficient professional performance.

It is further alleged that on an unknown date between 12 February 2016 and 24 August 2016, Dr Chopra instigated the production of a false audit trail in relation to a medical bag.

It is alleged that, by reason of these matters, Dr Chopra’s fitness to practice is impaired by reason of misconduct .


This reflects the allegation as it stands at the start of the hearing. The allegation may be amended as the hearing proceeds and when findings of fact are made by the tribunal.


All decisions are published online within 28 days of the conclusion of the hearing.


If you're a journalist and need up to date information about the allegation throughout the course of the hearing, please contact our press office at pressoffice@mpts-uk.org or call 0161 250 6868.

Private hearings

In accordance with Rule 41(2) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004, the tribunal may decide to exclude the public from the proceedings or any part of the proceedings, where they consider that the circumstances of the case outweigh the public interest in holding the hearing in public.