Government of Gujarat vs MANSUKHBHAI NATHUBHAI CHUDASAMA — 128/2026

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: GJJN080001442026

Filing Number

128/2026

Filing Date

08-Jan-2026

Registration No

128/2026

Registration Date

08-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 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203030250691

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.MANSUKHBHAI NATHUBHAI CHUDASAMA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court convicted Mansukhbhai Nathubhai Chudasama under Section 64(1)(b) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing alcohol illegally. The accused pleaded guilty, citing his poor economic circumstances, illiteracy, and family responsibilities as mitigating factors. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 or two days simple imprisonment in default, applying leniency based on established judicial precedent regarding socio-economic hardship. 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. 13-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 20-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 08-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 128/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted Mansukhbhai Nathubhai Chudasama under Section 64(1)(b) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing alcohol illegally. The accused pleaded guilty, citing his poor economic circumstances, illiteracy, and family responsibilities as mitigating factors. The court sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 or two days simple imprisonment in default, applying leniency based on established judicial precedent regarding socio-economic hardship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case