Government of Gujarat vs SHAILESHBHAI KHIMABHAI CHAVDA — 39/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-A-A. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILT on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDW020000632026
Filing Number
39/2026
Filing Date
05-Jan-2026
Registration No
39/2026
Registration Date
05-Jan-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT, KHAMBHALIA
Judge
4-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILT
Last updated 10-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11185004251809
Police Station
JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.SHAILESHBHAI KHIMABHAI CHAVDA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Order
Case Summary: CC.No.39/2026 The court convicted respondent Shaileshbhai Khimabhai Chavda under Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and Amendments 2016, Section 65 (IPC). The respondent voluntarily confessed to the offense and filed a plea for leniency. Considering the respondent's admission, circumstances, and adequate reasons for mitigation, the court imposed a reduced sentence of ₹300 fine instead of maximum punishment, demonstrating judicial discretion to impose minimum sentencing where warranted. 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
-
09-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
07-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
05-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 39/2026
Case Summary: CC.No.39/2026 The court convicted respondent Shaileshbhai Khimabhai Chavda under Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and Amendments 2016, Section 65 (IPC). The respondent voluntarily confessed to the offense and filed a plea for leniency. Considering the respondent's admission, circumstances, and adequate reasons for mitigation, the court imposed a reduced sentence of ₹300 fine instead of maximum punishment, demonstrating judicial discretion to impose minimum sentencing where warranted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts