Government of Gujarat vs RAVI JAVERBHAI SOLANKI — 240/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-A-A. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILT on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDW020003522026
Filing Number
240/2026
Filing Date
22-Jan-2026
Registration No
240/2026
Registration Date
22-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
11185004251611
Police Station
JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.RAVI JAVERBHAI SOLANKI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Order
Case Summary: CC.No.240/2026 Court Decision: The court convicted respondent Ravi Javerbhai Solanki under Section 65(A.P.) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 (as amended 2016) and sentenced him to a fine of ₹300 (three hundred rupees). Additionally, if the fine is not paid, the respondent shall undergo simple imprisonment for two days. Key Reasoning: The court found that while the accused was not compelled to confess guilt, he voluntarily admitted to the offense during police investigation. Considering the accused's circumstances, conduct, and mitigating factors under the sentencing principles established in precedent, the court exercised its discretion to impose minimum punishment rather than the maximum prescribed sentence, balancing justice with rehabilitation considerations. 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
-
07-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
22-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
22-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 240/2026
Case Summary: CC.No.240/2026 Court Decision: The court convicted respondent Ravi Javerbhai Solanki under Section 65(A.P.) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 (as amended 2016) and sentenced him to a fine of ₹300 (three hundred rupees). Additionally, if the fine is not paid, the respondent shall undergo simple imprisonment for two days. Key Reasoning: The court found that while the accused was not compelled to confess guilt, he voluntarily admitted to the offense during police investigation. Considering the accused's circumstances, conduct, and mitigating factors under the sentencing principles established in precedent, the court exercised its discretion to impose minimum punishment rather than the maximum prescribed sentence, balancing justice with rehabilitation considerations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts