THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs AJAYBHAI RASIKBHAI CHUNARA — 60/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJKH110000922026
e-Filing Number
19-01-2026
Filing Number
60/2026
Filing Date
17-02-2026
Registration No
60/2026
Registration Date
17-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, KHEDA
Judge
1-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
722
Police Station
KHEDA POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Respondent(s)
AJAYBHAI RASIKBHAI CHUNARA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Ajaybhai Rasikbhai Chunara (60/2026) The court convicted the respondent under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 9 liters of country liquor valued at ₹1,800. The respondent pleaded guilty and requested lenient sentencing, citing his poor economic status and family responsibilities. The court imposed a reduced sentence of imprisonment until trial completion plus a fine of ₹200 (instead of the statutory minimum), exercising judicial discretion considering the respondent's first-time offense, financial hardship, and genuine reformation commitment under established precedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Ajaybhai Rasikbhai Chunara (60/2026) The court convicted the respondent under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 9 liters of country liquor valued at ₹1,800. The respondent pleaded guilty and requested lenient sentencing, citing his poor economic status and family responsibilities. The court imposed a reduced sentence of imprisonment until trial completion plus a fine of ₹200 (instead of the statutory minimum), exercising judicial discretion considering the respondent's first-time offense, financial hardship, and genuine reformation commitment under established precedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts