Government of Gujarat vs Hasmukhbhai Kesharsinh Suvan — 940/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDH030011222026

Filing Number

940/2026

Filing Date

24-Feb-2026

Registration No

940/2026

Registration Date

24-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEVGADHBARIA

Judge

2-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 16-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Hasmukhbhai Kesharsinh Suvan

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Summary The court held that Section 66(1)(B) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act (liquor consumption offense) is now a non-cognizable offense following the 2017 amendment that repealed Section 118. Since the maximum punishment for a first offense is only six months imprisonment, it falls under Schedule I, Part II of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, requiring magistrate permission before cognizance can be taken. The court dropped proceedings against the accused for lack of jurisdiction, with liberty to the prosecution to pursue appropriate legal remedies. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 24-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 940/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court held that Section 66(1)(B) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act (liquor consumption offense) is now a non-cognizable offense following the 2017 amendment that repealed Section 118. Since the maximum punishment for a first offense is only six months imprisonment, it falls under Schedule I, Part II of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, requiring magistrate permission before cognizance can be taken. The court dropped proceedings against the accused for lack of jurisdiction, with liberty to the prosecution to pursue appropriate legal remedies. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case