Government of Gujarat vs ANILKUMAR HARJIVANBHAI JOSHI — 1229/2025

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: GJJN080017892025

Filing Number

1229/2025

Filing Date

18-Nov-2025

Registration No

1229/2025

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

11203030250528

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.ANILKUMAR HARJIVANBHAI JOSHI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: 1229/2025 The court convicted Anilkumar Harjivanbhai Joshi under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 1,004, with alternative imprisonment of two days if the fine remains unpaid. The court accepted the accused's plea of guilt and granted him reformation benefit, considering his socioeconomic circumstances 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. 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. 1229/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 1229/2025 The court convicted Anilkumar Harjivanbhai Joshi under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 1,004, with alternative imprisonment of two days if the fine remains unpaid. The court accepted the accused's plea of guilt and granted him reformation benefit, considering his socioeconomic circumstances 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