Government of Gujarat vs RAKESHBHAI KANTIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - D K PARMAR — 1223/2025

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: GJJN080017832025

Filing Number

1223/2025

Filing Date

18-Nov-2025

Registration No

1223/2025

Registration Date

18-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

11203030240673

Police Station

KESHOD POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT

Year

2024

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAKESHBHAI KANTIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - D K PARMAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court convicted accused Rakeshbhai Kantibhai Parmar under Section 275 of the IPC and Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, sentencing him to a fine of ₹100/- with an alternate imprisonment of 2 days if fine remains unpaid. The court ordered confiscation of valuables and vehicles, and directed release of seized property upon proper verification, considering the accused's impoverished circumstances and family responsibilities as mitigating factors for leniency. 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. 09-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 05-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 18-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1223/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted accused Rakeshbhai Kantibhai Parmar under Section 275 of the IPC and Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, sentencing him to a fine of ₹100/- with an alternate imprisonment of 2 days if fine remains unpaid. The court ordered confiscation of valuables and vehicles, and directed release of seized property upon proper verification, considering the accused's impoverished circumstances and family responsibilities as mitigating factors for leniency. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case