Government of Gujarat vs Vinodbhai Somabhai Parmar Advocate - V C BARIA — 339/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887 Section 12. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDH030004472026
Filing Number
339/2026
Filing Date
02-Feb-2026
Registration No
339/2026
Registration Date
02-Feb-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, DEVGADHBARIA
Judge
2-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Last updated 16-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.Vinodbhai Somabhai Parmar Advocate - V C BARIA
-
2.Rajubhai Somabhai Parmar
Adv. V C BARIA
-
3.Jayeshbhai Rameshbhai Patel
Adv. V C BARIA
-
4.Parsotam Alias Manubhai Laxmanbhai Harizan
Adv. V C BARIA
-
5.Rohitbhai Bakabhai Harizan
Adv. V C BARIA
-
6.Himatbhai Alias Lalo Abhesingbhai Dayra
Adv. V C BARIA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Summary The court convicted six accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 12, for illegal possession and sale of liquor worth ₹3,110. The accused pleaded guilty and sought leniency citing family responsibilities and poverty. The court imposed minimum sentences, ordering confiscation of recovered cash and contraband, destruction of non-valuable items post-appeal, and return of vehicles/mobile phones after ownership verification as per procedure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 339/2026
Summary The court convicted six accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, Section 12, for illegal possession and sale of liquor worth ₹3,110. The accused pleaded guilty and sought leniency citing family responsibilities and poverty. The court imposed minimum sentences, ordering confiscation of recovered cash and contraband, destruction of non-valuable items post-appeal, and return of vehicles/mobile phones after ownership verification as per procedure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts