THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs KALUSINH JABBARSINH VAGHELA — 192/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66-1-B,85(1). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK210002172026

Filing Number

192/2026

Filing Date

16-Feb-2026

Registration No

192/2026

Registration Date

16-Feb-2026

Court

Taluka Court, Lakhni

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

11996001260032

Police Station

AGTHALA POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66-1-B,85(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KALUSINH JABBARSINH VAGHELA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted respondent Kalusinh Jabbarsinh Vaghela under Gujarat Prohibition Act (IPC Sections 64(1)(b) and 85(1)) for illegal possession and consumption of alcohol. However, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 fine instead of imprisonment, considering mitigating factors: the respondent's poor socioeconomic status, being the sole earning family member, genuine remorse, confession, and this being a first offense, making him eligible for mercy consideration under sentencing guidelines. 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

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 16-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 192/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted respondent Kalusinh Jabbarsinh Vaghela under Gujarat Prohibition Act (IPC Sections 64(1)(b) and 85(1)) for illegal possession and consumption of alcohol. However, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 fine instead of imprisonment, considering mitigating factors: the respondent's poor socioeconomic status, being the sole earning family member, genuine remorse, confession, and this being a first offense, making him eligible for mercy consideration under sentencing guidelines. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case