THE STATE OF GUJARAT DATHA POLICE STATION vs HIMMATBHAI JABARBHAI DHAPA — 654/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)(b). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN040012892025
e-Filing Number
06-03-2025
Filing Number
654/2025
Filing Date
22-05-2025
Registration No
654/2025
Registration Date
22-05-2025
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
340
Police Station
DATHA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT DATHA POLICE STATION
Respondent(s)
HIMMATBHAI JABARBHAI DHAPA
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 |
| 21-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 06-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 25-11-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 654/2025 The State of Gujarat (Datha Police Station) v. Himmatbhai Jabarbhai Dhapa The court convicted the respondent under IPC Section 275 (adulteration of food/drugs) on the basis of his voluntary guilty plea and confession. However, considering that this was his first offense, his status as a poor family man supporting dependents through manual labor, and the hardship a lengthy sentence would impose on his family, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 fine instead of the statutory punishment, while still maintaining the deterrent effect of the judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 654/2025 The State of Gujarat (Datha Police Station) v. Himmatbhai Jabarbhai Dhapa The court convicted the respondent under IPC Section 275 (adulteration of food/drugs) on the basis of his voluntary guilty plea and confession. However, considering that this was his first offense, his status as a poor family man supporting dependents through manual labor, and the hardship a lengthy sentence would impose on his family, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 fine instead of the statutory punishment, while still maintaining the deterrent effect of the judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts