Government of Gujarat vs SHAILESHBHAI AMUBHAI LUNASIYA — 1250/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 26th May 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJJN080018132025

Filing Number

1250/2025

Filing Date

18-Nov-2025

Registration No

1250/2025

Registration Date

18-Nov-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, KESHOD

Judge

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

Decision Date

26-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 27-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203030250750

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.SHAILESHBHAI AMUBHAI LUNASIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-May-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted respondent Shaileshbhai Amubhai Lunasiya under the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 or, in default, two days simple imprisonment. The court considered the respondent's plea of guilt, his socioeconomic status, and family responsibilities as mitigating factors while imposing the sentence. Consequently, the court ordered forfeiture of seized materials and vehicles as per law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-May-2026

    Disposed

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

  4. 22-Apr-2026

    Summons - Notice

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

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

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

  6. 10-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 05-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 18-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1250/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted respondent Shaileshbhai Amubhai Lunasiya under the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentenced him to a fine of ₹100 or, in default, two days simple imprisonment. The court considered the respondent's plea of guilt, his socioeconomic status, and family responsibilities as mitigating factors while imposing the sentence. Consequently, the court ordered forfeiture of seized materials and vehicles as per law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case