Government of Gujarat vs SURESHBHAI KARSHANBHAI BARIYA — 107/2026

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: GJJN080001222026

Filing Number

107/2026

Filing Date

08-Jan-2026

Registration No

107/2026

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

11203030250794

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.SURESHBHAI KARSHANBHAI BARIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: Government of Gujarat v. Sureshbhai Karshanbhai Bariya (Case 107/2026) The court convicted accused Sureshbhai Karshanbhai Bariya under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and Section 275 of the IPC, sentencing him to a fine of ₹1,004 or six months imprisonment in default. The court found the accused guilty based on his own confession and considering mitigating circumstances such as his impoverished background and family responsibilities, granting him the benefit of reformation under applicable judicial precedents. 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. 107/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Government of Gujarat v. Sureshbhai Karshanbhai Bariya (Case 107/2026) The court convicted accused Sureshbhai Karshanbhai Bariya under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and Section 275 of the IPC, sentencing him to a fine of ₹1,004 or six months imprisonment in default. The court found the accused guilty based on his own confession and considering mitigating circumstances such as his impoverished background and family responsibilities, granting him the benefit of reformation under applicable judicial precedents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case