Government of Gujarat vs SHAILENDRASINH KESHUBHA JADEJA — 93/2026

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: GJDW020001472026

Filing Number

93/2026

Filing Date

09-Jan-2026

Registration No

93/2026

Registration Date

09-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

11185004251720

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.SHAILENDRASINH KESHUBHA JADEJA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: CC.No. 93/2026 The court convicted Shailendrasinh Keshubha Jadeja under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and Amendments 2016, Section 66(1)(b) for an offense related to prohibition laws. The accused voluntarily confessed to the guilt and the court, considering his circumstances and rehabilitation potential, sentenced him to imprisonment of 150 rupees (appearing as a fine) rather than the maximum prescribed punishment, finding sufficient and compelling reasons to impose a lenient sentence that would allow him to rehabilitate in 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. 10-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 09-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 93/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC.No. 93/2026 The court convicted Shailendrasinh Keshubha Jadeja under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and Amendments 2016, Section 66(1)(b) for an offense related to prohibition laws. The accused voluntarily confessed to the guilt and the court, considering his circumstances and rehabilitation potential, sentenced him to imprisonment of 150 rupees (appearing as a fine) rather than the maximum prescribed punishment, finding sufficient and compelling reasons to impose a lenient sentence that would allow him to rehabilitate in 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