Government of Gujarat vs AMIT BHARATBHAI MAHETA — 680/2026

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: GJDW020010032026

Filing Number

680/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

680/2026

Registration Date

09-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 10-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11185004260106

Police Station

JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66-1-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AMIT BHARATBHAI MAHETA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary of CC.No.680/2026 The court convicted respondent Amit Bharatbhai Mehta under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and the 2016 amendments (Section 66(1)(b)) for an offense related to controlled substances. The court sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 150 rupees or, in default, simple imprisonment, considering his circumstances, background, and rehabilitation potential as mitigating factors for imposing a lenient sentence rather than the maximum prescribed penalty. 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

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 680/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CC.No.680/2026 The court convicted respondent Amit Bharatbhai Mehta under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 and the 2016 amendments (Section 66(1)(b)) for an offense related to controlled substances. The court sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 150 rupees or, in default, simple imprisonment, considering his circumstances, background, and rehabilitation potential as mitigating factors for imposing a lenient sentence rather than the maximum prescribed penalty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case