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

Case disposed

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

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65,A,A

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.

14-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

SUMMONS - NOTICE

05-02-2026

SUMMONS - NOTICE

29-12-2025

SUMMONS - NOTICE

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, KESHOD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case