THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs PRAVINJI KANTIJI THAKOR — 200/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK210002252026

Filing Number

200/2026

Filing Date

16-Feb-2026

Registration No

200/2026

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

11996001260018

Police Station

AGTHALA POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PRAVINJI KANTIJI THAKOR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary of Case 200/2026: State of Gujarat v. Pravinji Kantiji Thakor The court convicted respondent Pravinji Kantiji Thakor under IPC Section 65(a) for a general offense. Considering the respondent's voluntary confession, impoverished socio-economic circumstances as the sole earning family member, genuine remorse, and first-time offense, the court imposed lenient sentencing rather than maximum punishment, applying judicial discretion to balance law enforcement with rehabilitation potential. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 16-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 200/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 200/2026: State of Gujarat v. Pravinji Kantiji Thakor The court convicted respondent Pravinji Kantiji Thakor under IPC Section 65(a) for a general offense. Considering the respondent's voluntary confession, impoverished socio-economic circumstances as the sole earning family member, genuine remorse, and first-time offense, the court imposed lenient sentencing rather than maximum punishment, applying judicial discretion to balance law enforcement with rehabilitation potential. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case