Government of Gujarat vs RAMBHAI SAMATBHAI KANSAGRA Advocate - D S SANKHAT — 35/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAM040001192026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
35/2026
Filing Date
07-02-2026
Registration No
35/2026
Registration Date
07-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, KHAMBHA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
11193027250433
Police Station
KHAMBHA POLICE STATION - AMRELI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
RAMBHAI SAMATBHAI KANSAGRA Advocate - D S SANKHAT
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 05-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED | |
| 26-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing and consuming alcohol without a permit in a public place. Considering the accused's plea of guilt, confession, impoverished socio-economic background, and commitment to abstain from future crimes, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 (or 10 days simple imprisonment if unpaid) instead of the statutory minimum, relying on established precedent that "special and adequate reasons" peculiar to each accused must be recorded in writing to justify reduced sentences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing and consuming alcohol without a permit in a public place. Considering the accused's plea of guilt, confession, impoverished socio-economic background, and commitment to abstain from future crimes, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 (or 10 days simple imprisonment if unpaid) instead of the statutory minimum, relying on established precedent that "special and adequate reasons" peculiar to each accused must be recorded in writing to justify reduced sentences. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts