ASHOK S CHAHAL GUMASTA INSPECTOR vs UGAM MART VIPULBHAI — 89/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 Section 7. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJAH070001272026

Filing Number

89/2026

Filing Date

16-Jan-2026

Registration No

89/2026

Registration Date

16-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, DHOLKA

Judge

6-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 15-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 Section 7

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ASHOK S CHAHAL GUMASTA INSPECTOR

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UGAM MART VIPULBHAI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary: The Dholka Magistrate Court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Shops and Establishments Act for operating a business without proper authorization. Considering mitigating factors such as the accused's impoverished background, first-time offense, family dependents, and genuine remorse, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹5,000 fine (or 3 days imprisonment in default) instead of maximum punishment, deeming it just and appropriate for rehabilitation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 16-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 89/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Dholka Magistrate Court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Shops and Establishments Act for operating a business without proper authorization. Considering mitigating factors such as the accused's impoverished background, first-time offense, family dependents, and genuine remorse, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹5,000 fine (or 3 days imprisonment in default) instead of maximum punishment, deeming it just and appropriate for rehabilitation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case