Government of Gujarat vs BHARATSINH PRAVINSINH ALIAS KALUBHA JADEJA — 690/2026
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILT on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDW020010132026
Filing Number
690/2026
Filing Date
09-Mar-2026
Registration No
690/2026
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
11185004260248
Police Station
JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.BHARATSINH PRAVINSINH ALIAS KALUBHA JADEJA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: C.C.NO-690-2026 Court Decision: The court convicted Bharatsinh Pravinsinh (alias Kalubha Jadeja) under the Motor Vehicles Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) for operating a vehicle without a valid permit while intoxicated. He was sentenced to imprisonment and fined ₹2,150, with additional provisions for vehicle confiscation and alternative jail time if the fine remains unpaid. Key Reasoning: The accused voluntarily confessed to the offense, and the court found sufficient evidence supporting the charges. Considering the accused's circumstances as a poor, working-class individual committing his first offense, the court imposed a reduced sentence below the statutory minimum while maintaining proportional punishment and deterrence. 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
-
09-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 690/2026
Case Summary: C.C.NO-690-2026 Court Decision: The court convicted Bharatsinh Pravinsinh (alias Kalubha Jadeja) under the Motor Vehicles Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) for operating a vehicle without a valid permit while intoxicated. He was sentenced to imprisonment and fined ₹2,150, with additional provisions for vehicle confiscation and alternative jail time if the fine remains unpaid. Key Reasoning: The accused voluntarily confessed to the offense, and the court found sufficient evidence supporting the charges. Considering the accused's circumstances as a poor, working-class individual committing his first offense, the court imposed a reduced sentence below the statutory minimum while maintaining proportional punishment and deterrence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts