Government of Gujarat vs HANIFBHAI SALIMBHAI SHAHAMDAR — 41/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDW020000652026

Filing Number

41/2026

Filing Date

05-Jan-2026

Registration No

41/2026

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

11185004251805

Police Station

JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-A-A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.HANIFBHAI SALIMBHAI SHAHAMDAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted the respondent Hanifbhai Salimbhai Shahamdar under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 (as amended 2016) after he voluntarily confessed to the charges. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹300 with a default imprisonment of two days, considering mitigating circumstances and the precedent that courts retain discretion to impose lesser punishment when sufficient and special reasons exist. 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. 23-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 07-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 05-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 05-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 41/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the respondent Hanifbhai Salimbhai Shahamdar under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 (as amended 2016) after he voluntarily confessed to the charges. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹300 with a default imprisonment of two days, considering mitigating circumstances and the precedent that courts retain discretion to impose lesser punishment when sufficient and special reasons exist. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case