THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs MUNNIBEN DINESHBHAI VASAVA Advocate - K B VASAVA — 196/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBH090002412026

Filing Number

196/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

196/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, VALIA

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 27-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11199050260027

Police Station

VALIA POLICE STATION - BHARUCH DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MUNNIBEN DINESHBHAI VASAVA Advocate - K B VASAVA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Munniben Dineshbhai Vasava (196/2026) The court convicted respondent Munniben Dineshbhai Vasava under Section 271(2) of the Indian Penal Code (2023) and sentenced her to a fine of ₹200 with simple imprisonment for 3 days as an alternative. The court found that the respondent's police statement, made voluntarily and confessionally in nature, constituted sufficient evidence, and accepting the petitioner's submissions, the court imposed the punishment considering established legal principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Plea

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 196/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Munniben Dineshbhai Vasava (196/2026) The court convicted respondent Munniben Dineshbhai Vasava under Section 271(2) of the Indian Penal Code (2023) and sentenced her to a fine of ₹200 with simple imprisonment for 3 days as an alternative. The court found that the respondent's police statement, made voluntarily and confessionally in nature, constituted sufficient evidence, and accepting the petitioner's submissions, the court imposed the punishment considering established legal principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case