THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs KANTABEN BHIKHABHAI GOTABHAI GOHEL — 95/2026

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: GJKH110001272026

e-Filing Number

22-12-2025

Filing Number

95/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

95/2026

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

667

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.KANTABEN BHIKHABHAI GOTABHAI GOHEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Kantaben Bhikhabhai Gotabhai Gohel (95/2026) The court convicted Kantaben under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 3 liters of illegal liquor worth ₹600, seized during a police check on 03/12/2025. The defendant pleaded guilty, claiming to be from a poor, laboring family needing leniency. The court imposed a reduced sentence of conviction and a fine of ₹200 (instead of the maximum penalty), considering the defendant's first offense, poor economic circumstances, and genuine remorse. The seized liquor was ordered destroyed. 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. 95/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Kantaben Bhikhabhai Gotabhai Gohel (95/2026) The court convicted Kantaben under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 3 liters of illegal liquor worth ₹600, seized during a police check on 03/12/2025. The defendant pleaded guilty, claiming to be from a poor, laboring family needing leniency. The court imposed a reduced sentence of conviction and a fine of ₹200 (instead of the maximum penalty), considering the defendant's first offense, poor economic circumstances, and genuine remorse. The seized liquor was ordered destroyed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case