Government of Gujarat vs YUVRAJSINH MAHOBATSINH VAGHELA — 688/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-A-A. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDW020010112026

Filing Number

688/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

688/2026

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

11185004260093

Police Station

JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-A-A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.YUVRAJSINH MAHOBATSINH VAGHELA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: CC.No.688/2026 The court convicted Yuvrajsinh Mahobatsinh Vaghela under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 (as amended 2016) for illicit liquor possession. The accused voluntarily confessed to the crime and filed a plea for reduced sentencing, which the court granted based on adequate and justifiable reasons, imposing a fine of ₹300 instead of the minimum prescribed penalty, with two days simple imprisonment as default 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

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 688/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CC.No.688/2026 The court convicted Yuvrajsinh Mahobatsinh Vaghela under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949 (as amended 2016) for illicit liquor possession. The accused voluntarily confessed to the crime and filed a plea for reduced sentencing, which the court granted based on adequate and justifiable reasons, imposing a fine of ₹300 instead of the minimum prescribed penalty, with two days simple imprisonment as default 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