THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs SHOBHANABEN SUNILBHAI TADVI — 70/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKH110001022026

e-Filing Number

08-12-2025

Filing Number

70/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

70/2026

Registration Date

17-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, KHEDA

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

619

Police Station

KHEDA POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHOBHANABEN SUNILBHAI TADVI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: 70/2026 - State of Gujarat v. Shobhanaben Sunilbhai Tadvi The court convicted respondent Shobhanaben Sunilbhai Tadvi under Section 65(a) of the Prohibition Act for possessing 4 liters of illicit liquor valued at ₹800. The accused pleaded guilty and sought lenient sentencing, citing her status as a poor, family-dependent woman. The court imposed a reduced sentence of ₹200 fine (instead of statutory maximum) and 5 days imprisonment, considering her mitigating circumstances, first-time offender status, and economic hardship, while canceling the seized liquor. 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

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 70/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 70/2026 - State of Gujarat v. Shobhanaben Sunilbhai Tadvi The court convicted respondent Shobhanaben Sunilbhai Tadvi under Section 65(a) of the Prohibition Act for possessing 4 liters of illicit liquor valued at ₹800. The accused pleaded guilty and sought lenient sentencing, citing her status as a poor, family-dependent woman. The court imposed a reduced sentence of ₹200 fine (instead of statutory maximum) and 5 days imprisonment, considering her mitigating circumstances, first-time offender status, and economic hardship, while canceling the seized liquor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case