CHANDRASHEKHAR SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — CRA/256/2025

Status: Motion Hearing Matters. Next hearing: : -.

Motion Hearing Matters Next hearing —

CNR: CGHC010042002025

Filing Number

CRA/1761/2025

Filing Date

27-Jan-2025

Registration No

CRA/256/2025

Registration Date

01-Feb-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS ( 14 )

Sub-Category

CRIMINAL MATTERS RELATING TO DRUGS & COSMETICS, NDPS ACT. ( 1416 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHANDRASHEKHAR SAHU

    Adv. ROHIT SHARMA,DEEPANJALI TIWARI,DEEPANJALI TIWARI, ,PRIYA SHARMA,PRIYA SHARMA,PRIYA SHARMA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar JaiswalView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the appellant Chandrashekhar Sahu's plea for suspension of sentence and bail (IA No. 01/2025) in an NDPS Act case. The court found that seizure of 108 litres of commercial quantity narcotics (Codeine Phosphate and Triprolidine Hydrochloride Syrup) from the appellant's exclusive possession without legal documentation constituted sufficient grounds to uphold the 10-year rigorous imprisonment sentence imposed by the trial court. The case has been listed for final hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Feb-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar VermaView PDF

  4. 27-Feb-2025

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma

  5. 27-Jan-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRA/256/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the appellant Chandrashekhar Sahu's plea for suspension of sentence and bail (IA No. 01/2025) in an NDPS Act case. The court found that seizure of 108 litres of commercial quantity narcotics (Codeine Phosphate and Triprolidine Hydrochloride Syrup) from the appellant's exclusive possession without legal documentation constituted sufficient grounds to uphold the 10-year rigorous imprisonment sentence imposed by the trial court. The case has been listed for final hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case