Government of Gujarat vs DILIPBHAI HARJIVANDAS LUHAR Advocate - D C BRAHMBHATT — 18/2026
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185,. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJKH040000332026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
18/2026
Filing Date
21-01-2026
Registration No
18/2026
Registration Date
21-01-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, MATAR
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
11204040250332
Police Station
MATAR POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
DILIPBHAI HARJIVANDAS LUHAR Advocate - D C BRAHMBHATT
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
WARRANT OF ARREST
WARRANT OF ARREST
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 13-03-2026 | WARRANT OF ARREST | |
| 09-03-2026 | WARRANT OF ARREST | |
| 26-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED | |
| 25-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The court convicted the accused under the Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) and Motor Vehicles Act Section 185 based on his voluntary confession. The accused was sentenced to simple imprisonment until the court rises, and fined a total of ₹3,100 (₹100 under Prohibition Act and ₹3,000 under MV Act), with 2 days simple imprisonment in default of payment. The court considered the accused's poverty, remorse, and dependents while imposing the lenient sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court convicted the accused under the Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) and Motor Vehicles Act Section 185 based on his voluntary confession. The accused was sentenced to simple imprisonment until the court rises, and fined a total of ₹3,100 (₹100 under Prohibition Act and ₹3,000 under MV Act), with 2 days simple imprisonment in default of payment. The court considered the accused's poverty, remorse, and dependents while imposing the lenient sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts