ASHOK S CHAHAL GUMASTA INSPECTOR vs PANJVANI TREDERS — 90/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 Section 7. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAH070001282026
Filing Number
90/2026
Filing Date
16-01-2026
Registration No
90/2026
Registration Date
16-01-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, DHOLKA
Judge
6-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
ASHOK S CHAHAL GUMASTA INSPECTOR
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
PANJVANI TREDERS
Hearing History
Judge: 6-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 06-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Criminal Case No. 90/2026, Dholka City Court, Gujarat Summary: The court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Shops and Establishments Act, Section 7, for operating an unauthorized trade business in Dholka municipal area. Considering mitigating factors—the accused's impoverished background, sole earning family member status, first-time offense, and expressed commitment to avoid future crimes—the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹5,000 fine (or 3 days simple imprisonment in default) rather than the maximum penalty. The court applied the principle that minimum appropriate punishment should be awarded when strong justifying reasons exist. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Criminal Case No. 90/2026, Dholka City Court, Gujarat Summary: The court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Shops and Establishments Act, Section 7, for operating an unauthorized trade business in Dholka municipal area. Considering mitigating factors—the accused's impoverished background, sole earning family member status, first-time offense, and expressed commitment to avoid future crimes—the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹5,000 fine (or 3 days simple imprisonment in default) rather than the maximum penalty. The court applied the principle that minimum appropriate punishment should be awarded when strong justifying reasons exist. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts