THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ASHOKBHAI BHAVANBHAI JOLIYA Advocate - M M SORTHIYA — 655/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN050009842025
Filing Number
655/2025
Filing Date
18-04-2025
Registration No
655/2025
Registration Date
18-04-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, MAHUVA
Judge
3-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
11198070240649
Police Station
MAHUVA RURAL POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
ASHOKBHAI BHAVANBHAI JOLIYA Advocate - M M SORTHIYA
Hearing History
Judge: 3-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
PLEA
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | PLEA |
| 10-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 19-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 12-12-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 54(1)(b) and IPC Section 185 for rash and negligent driving causing hurt, sentencing him to imprisonment of 3 days or fine of ₹100, and additional fine of ₹2,100 under Section 185 with 3 days simple imprisonment in default. The court considered mitigating factors including the accused's impoverished status, first-time offence, remorse, family dependence, and potential adverse impact of imprisonment on his family, warranting a lenient sentence below the prescribed minimum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 54(1)(b) and IPC Section 185 for rash and negligent driving causing hurt, sentencing him to imprisonment of 3 days or fine of ₹100, and additional fine of ₹2,100 under Section 185 with 3 days simple imprisonment in default. The court considered mitigating factors including the accused's impoverished status, first-time offence, remorse, family dependence, and potential adverse impact of imprisonment on his family, warranting a lenient sentence below the prescribed minimum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts