Govt. of Gujarat vs KARANSINH VALAKUBHAI GOHIL — 798/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS040009792026

Filing Number

798/2026

Filing Date

07-Mar-2026

Registration No

798/2026

Registration Date

07-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, UNA

Judge

2-2nd 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

11186003260116

Police Station

NAVABANDAR MARINE POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185
Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Govt. of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KARANSINH VALAKUBHAI GOHIL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The court found the accused guilty under MV Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) after the accused voluntarily pleaded guilty. Applying the principle that "special and adequate reasons" must exist to impose less than minimum punishment, the court imposed lenient sentences considering the accused's financial condition and plea for mercy. The accused was sentenced to pay a fine of ₹1,100 (₹1,000 under MV Act + ₹100 under Prohibition Act) with 2 days simple imprisonment as default punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 798/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court found the accused guilty under MV Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) after the accused voluntarily pleaded guilty. Applying the principle that "special and adequate reasons" must exist to impose less than minimum punishment, the court imposed lenient sentences considering the accused's financial condition and plea for mercy. The accused was sentenced to pay a fine of ₹1,100 (₹1,000 under MV Act + ₹100 under Prohibition Act) with 2 days simple imprisonment as default punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case