THE STATE OF GUJARAT DATHA POLICE STATION vs jagdishbhai nanjibhai paramar — 554/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)(b). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN040011702025
e-Filing Number
11-04-2025
Filing Number
554/2025
Filing Date
15-05-2025
Registration No
554/2025
Registration Date
15-05-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, TALAJA
Judge
6-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
80
Police Station
DATHA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT DATHA POLICE STATION
Respondent(s)
jagdishbhai nanjibhai paramar
Hearing History
Judge: 6-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
ORDER
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 06-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 23-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 13-12-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case 554/2025 Summary The court convicted Jagdishbhai Nanjibhai Paramar under the Indian Penal Code Section 275 (adulteration of food/substances) after he confessed to the charges. Considering mitigating factors—including that this was his first offense, his role as the sole family breadwinner from a poor background, and his expressions of remorse and commitment to reform—the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹100 fine instead of the statutory imprisonment, deeming this proportionate to achieve justice while protecting his family's welfare. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 554/2025 Summary The court convicted Jagdishbhai Nanjibhai Paramar under the Indian Penal Code Section 275 (adulteration of food/substances) after he confessed to the charges. Considering mitigating factors—including that this was his first offense, his role as the sole family breadwinner from a poor background, and his expressions of remorse and commitment to reform—the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹100 fine instead of the statutory imprisonment, deeming this proportionate to achieve justice while protecting his family's welfare. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts