State of Gujarat vs MADHUBEN LAKHMANBHAI KHUNTAD — 359/2026

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: GJGS020006612026

Filing Number

359/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

359/2026

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

11186004260062

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.MADHUBEN LAKHMANBHAI KHUNTAD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court found the accused, Madhubben, guilty under Section 27 of the BNS (corresponding to Section 65A IPC) for a prohibition-related offense. Exercising discretion based on special circumstances, the accused's economic condition, and plea for mercy, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹500 fine with imprisonment till rising of court, and one day simple imprisonment in default of fine payment. The seized contraband was ordered to be destroyed 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. 359/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court found the accused, Madhubben, guilty under Section 27 of the BNS (corresponding to Section 65A IPC) for a prohibition-related offense. Exercising discretion based on special circumstances, the accused's economic condition, and plea for mercy, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹500 fine with imprisonment till rising of court, and one day simple imprisonment in default of fine payment. The seized contraband was ordered to be destroyed 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