Secretly and Stealthily) is a 2001 Indian Hindi-language romantic drama film directed by Abbas–Mustan, with screenplay and story from Javed Siddiqui and Neeraj Vora respectively.

Starring Salman Khan, Rani Mukerji and Preity Zinta in lead roles, the film's music is composed by Anu Malik and lyrics are penned by Sameer.

Initially set to release on 22 December 2000, Chori Chori Chupke Chupke's release was delayed for several months when producer Nazim Rizvi and financier Bharat Shah were arrested and the Central Bureau of Investigation seized the film's prints on the suspicion that the production had been funded by Chhota Shakeel of the Mumbai underworld.

On Dr. Balraj Chopra's advice, they decide to look for a surrogate mother to bear Raj's child and hide Priya's infertility from his conservative family.

Since the process of artificial insemination could be revealed in the Indian media due to the family's renown and position in society, the couple agree that pregnancy should be achieved by means of sexual relations between Raj and the surrogate mother.

While Priya reaches for pregnancy-simulating pillows, the family meets the heavily pregnant Madhu who is introduced to them as a friend staying with them while her husband is travelling for business.

[6] The three leads, Salman Khan, Rani Mukerji, and Preity Zinta, previously starred together in the romantic comedy Har Dil Jo Pyar Karega (2000).

[21] Anupama Chopra of India Today described Zinta's character of Madhubala as hooker with a heart of gold, as did academic Lucia Krämer.

[24] Bhawana Somaaya, while critical of the film's "regular packaging of commercial clichés", commended it for the unique portrayal of the wife, played by Mukerji, who is the sole decision-maker in the family throughout the entire process of surrogacy.

[26] According to the Indian trade website Box Office India, with around two million units sold, the soundtrack became the sixth highest-selling music album of the year.

[33] Due to the controversy surrounding its delayed release—and the recurrent publicity around it—the film was expected to be a big success, with 325 prints sold before release.

Preity Zinta's performance, in what was seen as an unconventional role, was especially noted by a number of critics, with high praise for her portrayal of the gradual change her character goes through over the course of the story.

[44] Likewise, Nikhat Kazmi of The Times of India noted Zinta for keeping "the adrenalin gushing" and wrote of "riveting moments" where she "shows flashes of a fine performance".

[45] Ziya Us Salam of The Hindu, though similarly fond of Zinta for putting "life into her character of Madhubala", found the actress less convincing in "mouthing the inanities used by the women of the street".

She considered Mukerji to be "handicapped with a role that doesn't give her much scope besides weeping and sobbing" and stated that Khan's performance lacked substance.

[41] Raheja described Khan as "overtly subdued" as opposed to his recent comic roles, but wrote of Mukerji, "The emotions that drive Rani Mukherji's character are not given either a layered detailing or an adequate exposition so she comes across as pale as the pastel-coloured dresses she favours".

[43] Kazmi similarly disliked their characters in contrast to Zinta's: "From a street-walker to sensitive young girl and then a jealous lover - stray vignettes of flesh and blood form from Preity which come as a respite in a terrain dominated by an ever-say-cheese and forever understanding Rani and an unruffled, mumbling Salman who plays the perfect gentleman with the zeal of a zombie.

Taran Adarsh from the entertainment portal Bollywood Hungama was positive of the film, concluding it "lives up to the towering expectations thanks to the solid drama".

[29][45] Likewise, Us Salam noted the film's "loads of good music, beautiful locales, sweet smiles and lovely feel", and Shamim shared similar sentiments, appreciating the directors for not allowing "any moral issue to cloud the narrative" and filling "the screen with mesmerising charm and beauty of the lifestyle of a well-knit family".

Still, he ultimately noted an "engrossing" second half and commended the directors for having "done their best to bring a fair amount of conviction while putting it across on the screen".

[42] Vinayak Chakravorty, who gave the film a three-star rating, noted its resemblance to Doosri Dulhan and criticised it for occasionally coming across as "a veritable rerun of the stereotypes".

Raheja was critical of the film's lack of subtlety but believed the directors are "masters of pace and don't allow your attention to wander".

[39] In a 2003 column for Sify about the portrayal of sex-workers in Hindi films, Subhash K. Jha wrote of Zinta that in spite of being "uncomfortable about using all the foul language ... Once she entered the zone of the rented womb Preity had a ball.