Government of Gujarat vs SUMITBHAI PRAVINBHAI SOLANKI — 105/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJJN080001202026

Filing Number

105/2026

Filing Date

08-Jan-2026

Registration No

105/2026

Registration Date

08-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, KESHOD

Judge

1-Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203030250921

Police Station

KESHOD POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SUMITBHAI PRAVINBHAI SOLANKI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: 105/2026 The court convicted Sumitbhai Pravinbhai Solanki under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 or, in default, simple imprisonment for 2 days. The court found the accused guilty of the offense after he pleaded guilty and admitted to the crime, with the court considering his background as belonging to a poor class and granting him the benefit of probation while imposing the monetary penalty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

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

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

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

  5. 20-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 08-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 105/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 105/2026 The court convicted Sumitbhai Pravinbhai Solanki under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 or, in default, simple imprisonment for 2 days. The court found the accused guilty of the offense after he pleaded guilty and admitted to the crime, with the court considering his background as belonging to a poor class and granting him the benefit of probation while imposing the monetary penalty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case