State of Gujarat vs PRAFULBHAI RATNABHAI BHUVA — 310/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS020005982026

Filing Number

310/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

310/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

Civil Court, Veraval

Judge

10-4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 21-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PRAFULBHAI RATNABHAI BHUVA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court found the accused Prafulbhai Ratnabhai Bhuva guilty under Section 27(b) of the BNS read with Section 6(p) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 2016, and imposed a lenient sentence of ₹500 fine or one day simple imprisonment in default, considering the accused's voluntary confession, financial condition, and the principles established requiring special reasons for sentences below the statutory minimum. The court exercised judicial discretion to give the accused a chance for reformation while upholding the ends of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 310/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court found the accused Prafulbhai Ratnabhai Bhuva guilty under Section 27(b) of the BNS read with Section 6(p) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 2016, and imposed a lenient sentence of ₹500 fine or one day simple imprisonment in default, considering the accused's voluntary confession, financial condition, and the principles established requiring special reasons for sentences below the statutory minimum. The court exercised judicial discretion to give the accused a chance for reformation while upholding the ends of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case