Government of Gujarat vs DILIPBHAI DUDABHAI SONDARVA Advocate - G J MAKADIYA — 1106/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65,A,A. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJJN080016542025
Filing Number
1106/2025
Filing Date
10-11-2025
Registration No
1106/2025
Registration Date
10-11-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, KESHOD
Judge
1-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
11203030250709
Police Station
KESHOD POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
DILIPBHAI DUDABHAI SONDARVA Advocate - G J MAKADIYA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
SUMMONS - NOTICE
SUMMONS - NOTICE
SUMMONS - NOTICE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
| 05-02-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
| 29-12-2025 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court convicted accused Dilipbhai Dudabhai Sondarva under Section 65(A) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and Section 275 of the IPC, sentencing him to a fine of ₹500 (or 2 days simple imprisonment in default). The court considered the accused's claim of being from a poor background and having family responsibilities, finding rehabilitation possible, and imposed a lenient sentence accordingly. All seized articles, vehicles, and penalty amounts were ordered to be forfeited or disposed of as per legal procedure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court convicted accused Dilipbhai Dudabhai Sondarva under Section 65(A) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and Section 275 of the IPC, sentencing him to a fine of ₹500 (or 2 days simple imprisonment in default). The court considered the accused's claim of being from a poor background and having family responsibilities, finding rehabilitation possible, and imposed a lenient sentence accordingly. All seized articles, vehicles, and penalty amounts were ordered to be forfeited or disposed of as per legal procedure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts