State of Gujarat vs DHAVAL MAHENDRABHAI BHORDE — 353/2026

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: GJGS020006542026

Filing Number

353/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

353/2026

Registration Date

09-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 23-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11186004260024

Police Station

PRABHAS PATAN POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

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.DHAVAL MAHENDRABHAI BHORDE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court found the accused Dhaval Mehendrabhai Bhored guilty under Section 67A of the BNSS (prohibition offense) after he voluntarily confessed to the charges. Considering special and adequate reasons including the accused's financial condition and plea for mercy, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹500 fine, or one day simple imprisonment if the fine is not paid, and ordered destruction of seized contraband materials after the appeal period. 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. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 353/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court found the accused Dhaval Mehendrabhai Bhored guilty under Section 67A of the BNSS (prohibition offense) after he voluntarily confessed to the charges. Considering special and adequate reasons including the accused's financial condition and plea for mercy, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹500 fine, or one day simple imprisonment if the fine is not paid, and ordered destruction of seized contraband materials after the appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case