Government of Gujarat vs AMIT BHARATBHAI MAHETA — 650/2026

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: GJDW020009512026

Filing Number

650/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

650/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-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

11185004252059

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

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AMIT BHARATBHAI MAHETA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary of Case CC.No.650/2026 The court convicted Amit Bharatbhai Maheta under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 66(1)(b) after he voluntarily confessed to the offense during police investigation. Considering the accused's circumstances and background, the court imposed a reduced sentence of 150 rupees fine (instead of maximum punishment), finding sufficient and reasonable grounds to exercise discretionary leniency while maintaining justice and social welfare. 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. 12-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 650/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case CC.No.650/2026 The court convicted Amit Bharatbhai Maheta under Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 66(1)(b) after he voluntarily confessed to the offense during police investigation. Considering the accused's circumstances and background, the court imposed a reduced sentence of 150 rupees fine (instead of maximum punishment), finding sufficient and reasonable grounds to exercise discretionary leniency while maintaining justice and social welfare. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case