Government of Gujarat vs RAMESH RAMSANGBHAI MAKAVANA — 118/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-A-A. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILT on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDW020001782026
Filing Number
118/2026
Filing Date
12-Jan-2026
Registration No
118/2026
Registration Date
12-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 27-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11185004251614
Police Station
JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.RAMESH RAMSANGBHAI MAKAVANA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Order
Case Summary: CC.No.118/2026 Government of Gujarat v. Ramesh Ramsangbhai Makavana The court convicted the respondent under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (as amended 2016) for possessing and consuming alcohol. Considering the respondent's circumstances, mitigating factors, and rehabilitation potential, the court imposed a reduced sentence of a fine of ₹300 instead of the minimum statutory penalty, along with two days simple imprisonment in default of payment. The judgment emphasizes the court's discretion to award lenient sentences when sufficient and special reasons exist, balancing justice with the offender's rehabilitation prospects. 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
-
12-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
28-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 118/2026
Case Summary: CC.No.118/2026 Government of Gujarat v. Ramesh Ramsangbhai Makavana The court convicted the respondent under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (as amended 2016) for possessing and consuming alcohol. Considering the respondent's circumstances, mitigating factors, and rehabilitation potential, the court imposed a reduced sentence of a fine of ₹300 instead of the minimum statutory penalty, along with two days simple imprisonment in default of payment. The judgment emphasizes the court's discretion to award lenient sentences when sufficient and special reasons exist, balancing justice with the offender's rehabilitation prospects. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts