THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ASHOKBHAI DUDABHAI JADAV Advocate - P U GAUSWAMI — 726/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN050010552025
Filing Number
726/2025
Filing Date
19-04-2025
Registration No
726/2025
Registration Date
19-04-2025
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
11198035250183
Police Station
MAHUVA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
ASHOKBHAI DUDABHAI JADAV Advocate - P U GAUSWAMI
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 |
| 11-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 19-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 12-12-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court convicted Ashokbhai Dudabhai Jadav under IPC Section 275 (Prohibition of Sale of Certain Offences Act) and sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 with alternative simple imprisonment of 5 days if the fine remains unpaid. The court considered mitigating factors including the accused's impoverished financial status, family dependents, potential adverse impact of imprisonment on his family's welfare, and the rehabilitative purpose of sentencing, justifying the imposition of minimum punishment rather than the statutory maximum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court convicted Ashokbhai Dudabhai Jadav under IPC Section 275 (Prohibition of Sale of Certain Offences Act) and sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 with alternative simple imprisonment of 5 days if the fine remains unpaid. The court considered mitigating factors including the accused's impoverished financial status, family dependents, potential adverse impact of imprisonment on his family's welfare, and the rehabilitative purpose of sentencing, justifying the imposition of minimum punishment rather than the statutory maximum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts