THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ASHOKBHAI CHHAGANBHAI MAHIDA Advocate - M M SHIYAL — 882/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN050012242025
Filing Number
882/2025
Filing Date
28-04-2025
Registration No
882/2025
Registration Date
28-04-2025
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
11198035240310
Police Station
MAHUVA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
ASHOKBHAI CHHAGANBHAI MAHIDA Advocate - M M SHIYAL
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 |
| 26-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 13-12-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
| 18-11-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
The High Court of Gujarat convicted Ashokbhai Chhaganbhai Mahida under Section 64(1) of the Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 100 (or five days simple imprisonment if fine is not paid), showing leniency based on the accused's impoverished background, family responsibilities, and circumstances that warranted reduced punishment below the statutory minimum. The court exercised its discretionary power to impose a lighter sentence, considering the accused's socioeconomic condition and potential adverse impact on his dependents if imprisoned. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Gujarat convicted Ashokbhai Chhaganbhai Mahida under Section 64(1) of the Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 100 (or five days simple imprisonment if fine is not paid), showing leniency based on the accused's impoverished background, family responsibilities, and circumstances that warranted reduced punishment below the statutory minimum. The court exercised its discretionary power to impose a lighter sentence, considering the accused's socioeconomic condition and potential adverse impact on his dependents if imprisoned. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts