Government of Gujarat vs RAMESHBHAI PUNJABHAI RAVALIYA — 61/2026

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: GJJN080000722026

Filing Number

61/2026

Filing Date

05-Jan-2026

Registration No

61/2026

Registration Date

05-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, KESHOD

Judge

2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203030250831

Police Station

KESHOD POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65,A,A

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAMESHBHAI PUNJABHAI RAVALIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court found the accused guilty of committing an offense under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act (relating to an educated person committing a liquor-related offense) and sentenced him to imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500, or in default, two days simple imprisonment. The court considered the accused's socio-economic circumstances, family responsibilities, and financial hardship as mitigating factors while imposing the sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 17-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 05-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 61/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court found the accused guilty of committing an offense under Section 65 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act (relating to an educated person committing a liquor-related offense) and sentenced him to imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500, or in default, two days simple imprisonment. The court considered the accused's socio-economic circumstances, family responsibilities, and financial hardship as mitigating factors while imposing the sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case