Government of Gujarat vs SUMAT MANGHABHAI JOD — 55/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDW020000862026

Filing Number

55/2026

Filing Date

06-Jan-2026

Registration No

55/2026

Registration Date

06-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

11185004251921

Police Station

JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SUMAT MANGHABHAI JOD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court convicted respondent Sumatbhai Manghabhai Jod under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and its 2016 amendments (Section 66(1)(b)) for unlawful possession and consumption of alcohol. The accused voluntarily confessed to the offense and the court, considering his circumstances and applying principles of judicial discretion, sentenced him to imprisonment for one day (already served) and a fine of Rs. 150, imposing a lenient sentence based on sufficient and reasonable grounds justifying reduced punishment to allow for his rehabilitation and reintegration into society. 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. 09-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 06-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 06-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 55/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted respondent Sumatbhai Manghabhai Jod under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and its 2016 amendments (Section 66(1)(b)) for unlawful possession and consumption of alcohol. The accused voluntarily confessed to the offense and the court, considering his circumstances and applying principles of judicial discretion, sentenced him to imprisonment for one day (already served) and a fine of Rs. 150, imposing a lenient sentence based on sufficient and reasonable grounds justifying reduced punishment to allow for his rehabilitation and reintegration into society. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case