Government of Gujarat vs GAUTAM ALIAS GOTIYO KHIMAJIBHAI DORU — 385/2026

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: GJDW020005952026

Filing Number

385/2026

Filing Date

11-Feb-2026

Registration No

385/2026

Registration Date

11-Feb-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

11185004251924

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.GAUTAM ALIAS GOTIYO KHIMAJIBHAI DORU

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted Gautam Khimajibhai Doru under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and amendments 2016, Section 66(1)(b) for an offense related to security/prohibition violations. The accused voluntarily confessed to the guilt and was sentenced to a fine of ₹150 (or one day imprisonment in default), with the court considering his circumstances and mitigating factors to impose a minimal sentence rather than harsher punishment. 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-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 11-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 11-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 385/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted Gautam Khimajibhai Doru under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and amendments 2016, Section 66(1)(b) for an offense related to security/prohibition violations. The accused voluntarily confessed to the guilt and was sentenced to a fine of ₹150 (or one day imprisonment in default), with the court considering his circumstances and mitigating factors to impose a minimal sentence rather than harsher punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case