Government of Gujarat vs AJITSINH RAMSANG CHAUHAN — 61/2026

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: GJDW020000922026

Filing Number

61/2026

Filing Date

06-Jan-2026

Registration No

61/2026

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

11185004251871

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.AJITSINH RAMSANG CHAUHAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary of Case 61/2026 The court convicted respondent Ajitsinh Ramsang Chauhan under Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and amendments 2016, Section 66(1)(b) for illicit liquor offenses. However, considering the accused's circumstances, personal background, and rehabilitative potential, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 150 (rupees one hundred fifty only) as a fine instead of the prescribed minimum punishment, with an alternative simple imprisonment of one day if the fine remained unpaid. 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. 25-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 09-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 06-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 06-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 61/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 61/2026 The court convicted respondent Ajitsinh Ramsang Chauhan under Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and amendments 2016, Section 66(1)(b) for illicit liquor offenses. However, considering the accused's circumstances, personal background, and rehabilitative potential, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 150 (rupees one hundred fifty only) as a fine instead of the prescribed minimum punishment, with an alternative simple imprisonment of one day if the fine remained unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case