Govt. of Gujarat vs JAYESHBHAI NARANBHAI VANSH — 805/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A),116(B),. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJGS040009862026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

805/2026

Filing Date

07-03-2026

Registration No

805/2026

Registration Date

07-03-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, UNA

Judge

7-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

FIR Details

FIR Number

11186003260132

Police Station

NAVABANDAR MARINE POLICE STATION - GIR SOMNATH DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65(A)(A),116(B),

Petitioner(s)

Govt. of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

JAYESHBHAI NARANBHAI VANSH

Hearing History

Judge: 7-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

14-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

LOK ADALAT

07-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

The court convicted the accused, Jayeshbhai Naranbhai Vansh, under the Gujarat Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act-2016, sections 65(a) and 116(b), after the accused voluntarily confessed to the charges. Applying the principle that "special and adequate reasons" must exist to impose sentences below the statutory minimum, the court exercised leniency considering the accused's financial condition and potential for reform. The court sentenced the accused to a fine of ₹300, with one day's simple imprisonment as alternative punishment if the fine remains unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused, Jayeshbhai Naranbhai Vansh, under the Gujarat Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act-2016, sections 65(a) and 116(b), after the accused voluntarily confessed to the charges. Applying the principle that "special and adequate reasons" must exist to impose sentences below the statutory minimum, the court exercised leniency considering the accused's financial condition and potential for reform. The court sentenced the accused to a fine of ₹300, with one day's simple imprisonment as alternative punishment if the fine remains unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, UNA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case