Government of Gujarat vs TAJSINGBHAI RAMSUBHAI MACHHAR — 4799/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDH050055952025

Filing Number

4798/2025

Filing Date

19-Dec-2025

Registration No

4799/2025

Registration Date

19-Dec-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, JHALOD

Judge

3-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 16-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.TAJSINGBHAI RAMSUBHAI MACHHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court found the accused guilty of illegally possessing liquor without a permit under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and convicted him. Considering the accused's plea of guilt, his status as a poor first-time offender who is the sole breadwinner for his family, and precedent allowing lenient sentences in deserving cases, the court imposed a reduced sentence of 7 days simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200, instead of the statutory minimum punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 09-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 19-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 4799/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court found the accused guilty of illegally possessing liquor without a permit under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and convicted him. Considering the accused's plea of guilt, his status as a poor first-time offender who is the sole breadwinner for his family, and precedent allowing lenient sentences in deserving cases, the court imposed a reduced sentence of 7 days simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200, instead of the statutory minimum punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case