The State vs SUMITRABEN W/O VIKRAMBHAI KALIDASBHAI VASAVA Advocate - H N PARMAR — 104/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBH040001592026
Filing Number
104/2026
Filing Date
24-02-2026
Registration No
104/2026
Registration Date
24-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, HANSOT
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
11199024250572
Police Station
HANSOT POLICE STATION - BHARUCH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The State
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
SUMITRABEN W/O VIKRAMBHAI KALIDASBHAI VASAVA Advocate - H N PARMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 24-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 104/2026 The accused was charged under the Prohibition Act for an alcohol-related offense and voluntarily confessed to the crime. The court, considering the accused's voluntary confession, lack of prior criminal history, family and financial circumstances, and citing the principle established in *Natvarlal Harchand v. State*, imposed a sentence below the statutory minimum: a fine of Rs. 50, with 2 days simple imprisonment as an alternative if the fine remains unpaid. The seized liquor was ordered to be destroyed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 104/2026 The accused was charged under the Prohibition Act for an alcohol-related offense and voluntarily confessed to the crime. The court, considering the accused's voluntary confession, lack of prior criminal history, family and financial circumstances, and citing the principle established in *Natvarlal Harchand v. State*, imposed a sentence below the statutory minimum: a fine of Rs. 50, with 2 days simple imprisonment as an alternative if the fine remains unpaid. The seized liquor was ordered to be destroyed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts