State of Gujarat vs BHAVESHBHAI DANABHAI BHAJGOTAR — 512/2026

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: GJGS020008522026

Filing Number

512/2026

Filing Date

13-Mar-2026

Registration No

512/2026

Registration Date

13-Mar-2026

Court

Civil Court, Veraval

Judge

15-Addl. CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11186009260225

Police Station

VERAVAL 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.BHAVESHBHAI DANABHAI BHAJGOTAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court found accused Bhaveshbhai Danabhai Bhajgotar guilty under BNS Section 170 (corresponding to former IPC Section 65A) after he voluntarily confessed to the offense. Applying the principle that "special and adequate reasons" justify sentences below statutory minimums, and considering the accused's financial condition and plea for leniency, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 500 fine with time already served, or one day simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid. Seized prohibited material was ordered destroyed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. CIVIL Judge

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 512/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court found accused Bhaveshbhai Danabhai Bhajgotar guilty under BNS Section 170 (corresponding to former IPC Section 65A) after he voluntarily confessed to the offense. Applying the principle that "special and adequate reasons" justify sentences below statutory minimums, and considering the accused's financial condition and plea for leniency, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 500 fine with time already served, or one day simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid. Seized prohibited material was ordered destroyed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case