THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs BHAVESHBHAI PRAVINBHAI GOSAI — 1070/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 17th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN050014442025
Filing Number
1070/2025
Filing Date
15-May-2025
Registration No
1070/2025
Registration Date
15-May-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, MAHUVA
Judge
3-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
17-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Last updated 31-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11994002250051
Police Station
BHAVNAGAR RLY.POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.BHAVESHBHAI PRAVINBHAI GOSAI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Apr-2026
OrderView PDF
The court convicted respondent Bhaveshbhai Pravinbhai Gosai under IPC Section 275 (Provision Act) and sentenced him to a fine of ₹300 (or 5 days simple imprisonment in default). The court found that while the offense was established, mitigating circumstances—including the accused's poor economic and social status, this being his first offense, his family's dependence on him as the primary earner, and his legal ignorance—warranted imposing minimum punishment rather than maximum prescribed sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Apr-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Dec-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
18-Nov-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
13-Sep-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
09-Sep-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
12-Jul-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-May-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1070/2025
The court convicted respondent Bhaveshbhai Pravinbhai Gosai under IPC Section 275 (Provision Act) and sentenced him to a fine of ₹300 (or 5 days simple imprisonment in default). The court found that while the offense was established, mitigating circumstances—including the accused's poor economic and social status, this being his first offense, his family's dependence on him as the primary earner, and his legal ignorance—warranted imposing minimum punishment rather than maximum prescribed sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts