Government of Gujarat vs KANABHAI KARSHANBHAI HUMBLE — 174/2026

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: GJJN080001902026

Filing Number

174/2026

Filing Date

09-Jan-2026

Registration No

174/2026

Registration Date

09-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

11203030250277

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.KANABHAI KARSHANBHAI HUMBLE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: 174/2026 The court convicted Kanabhai Karshanbhai Humble under Section 65(A) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹500, with imprisonment for two days if the fine remains unpaid. The court also ordered forfeiture of seized cash, valuables, and vehicles, applying precedent from Gujarat High Court 2005 to determine that rehabilitation was justified given the accused's circumstances as a member of the lower economic class. 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. 09-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 174/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 174/2026 The court convicted Kanabhai Karshanbhai Humble under Section 65(A) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹500, with imprisonment for two days if the fine remains unpaid. The court also ordered forfeiture of seized cash, valuables, and vehicles, applying precedent from Gujarat High Court 2005 to determine that rehabilitation was justified given the accused's circumstances as a member of the lower economic class. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case