Government of Gujarat vs BHIMJIBHAI BHIKHABHAI MAKWANA Advocate - D K PARMAR — 1111/2025

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: GJJN080016592025

Filing Number

1111/2025

Filing Date

10-Nov-2025

Registration No

1111/2025

Registration Date

10-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 27-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203030240219

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.BHIMJIBHAI BHIKHABHAI MAKWANA Advocate - D K PARMAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court convicted the accused, Bhimjibhai Bhikhabhai Makwana, under Section 275 of the IPC and Section 64(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, sentencing him to a fine of ₹1,005 with imprisonment for 2 days in default. The court considered the accused's plea regarding his impoverished circumstances and reformation prospects while imposing the sentence, and ordered confiscation of seized valuables and vehicles, with property to be returned if no forfeiture order existed. 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. 12-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

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

  5. 05-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 29-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 10-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1111/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused, Bhimjibhai Bhikhabhai Makwana, under Section 275 of the IPC and Section 64(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, sentencing him to a fine of ₹1,005 with imprisonment for 2 days in default. The court considered the accused's plea regarding his impoverished circumstances and reformation prospects while imposing the sentence, and ordered confiscation of seized valuables and vehicles, with property to be returned if no forfeiture order existed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case