Tarun Kumar Lasar vs State Of Chhattisgarh Advocate - A.G. — CRA /139/2018
Case under Sec. 383 C.r.p.c - Jail Appeal Section U/S374(2)OFCRPC. Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 01st April 2026.
CNR: CGHC010001032018
Filing Number
CRA /2083/2018
Filing Date
12-01-2018
Registration No
CRA /139/2018
Registration Date
23-01-2018
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )
Sub-Category
CRIMINAL MATTER IN WHICH SENTENCES AWARDED IS MORE THAN 2 YEARS AND UP TO 10 YEARS ( 1431 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Tarun Kumar Lasar
Adv. NIRUPAMA BAJPAI,SHRAWAN KUMAR CHANDEL,SHRAWAN KUMAR CHANDEL, VIMAL BAJPAI,SHRWAN KUMAR CHANDEL
Bhojram Satnami
Respondent(s)
State Of Chhattisgarh Advocate - A.G.
Hearing History
Judge: Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma
FRESH MATTERS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 29-01-2018 | FRESH MATTERS |
Orders
Summary The High Court of Chhattisgarh affirmed the conviction of two appellants under Section 20(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act for possessing 9.6 kg of marijuana, finding substantial compliance with procedural requirements and credible prosecution evidence. However, the court reduced their imprisonment sentence from 3 years to the period already undergone (approximately 1 year, 3 months, 10 days), while maintaining the Rs. 20,000 fine for each appellant, citing the intermediate quantity involved and prolonged criminal proceedings since 2016. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The High Court of Chhattisgarh affirmed the conviction of two appellants under Section 20(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act for possessing 9.6 kg of marijuana, finding substantial compliance with procedural requirements and credible prosecution evidence. However, the court reduced their imprisonment sentence from 3 years to the period already undergone (approximately 1 year, 3 months, 10 days), while maintaining the Rs. 20,000 fine for each appellant, citing the intermediate quantity involved and prolonged criminal proceedings since 2016. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts