Government of Gujarat vs ANILBHAI JAGDISHBHAI RAVLIYA — 1072/2025

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: GJJN080016192025

Filing Number

1072/2025

Filing Date

07-Nov-2025

Registration No

1072/2025

Registration Date

07-Nov-2025

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 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203030250101

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.ANILBHAI JAGDISHBHAI RAVLIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted the accused, Aniruddha Hunileshbhai Ravaliya, under Section 65(A) of the Dharam Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹500 (or 2 days simple imprisonment if the fine is not paid). The court also ordered the forfeiture of valuables, vehicles, and penalty amounts as per applicable legal provisions, while granting the accused the benefit of probation considering his poor financial condition and family responsibilities. 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. 11-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

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

  5. 02-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 31-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 07-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1072/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused, Aniruddha Hunileshbhai Ravaliya, under Section 65(A) of the Dharam Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹500 (or 2 days simple imprisonment if the fine is not paid). The court also ordered the forfeiture of valuables, vehicles, and penalty amounts as per applicable legal provisions, while granting the accused the benefit of probation considering his poor financial condition and family responsibilities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case