THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs CHETANBHAI BHURABHAI KAHAR — 137/2026

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: GJKH110001722026

e-Filing Number

16-02-2026

Filing Number

137/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

137/2026

Registration Date

23-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

45

Police Station

KHEDA POLICE STATION - KHEDA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.CHETANBHAI BHURABHAI KAHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case 137/2026: State of Gujarat v. Chetanbhai Bhurabhai Kahar The court convicted the respondent under the Prohibition Act for possessing 5 liters of country liquor valued at ₹1,000, but imposed lenient punishment considering mitigating circumstances—his impoverished background, first-time offense, and family dependence on his labor. The court sentenced him to simple imprisonment until court rising and imposed a fine of ₹200, with 5 additional days' simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid, emphasizing that substantive justice is better served through measured rather than severe punishment. 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. 23-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 137/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case 137/2026: State of Gujarat v. Chetanbhai Bhurabhai Kahar The court convicted the respondent under the Prohibition Act for possessing 5 liters of country liquor valued at ₹1,000, but imposed lenient punishment considering mitigating circumstances—his impoverished background, first-time offense, and family dependence on his labor. The court sentenced him to simple imprisonment until court rising and imposed a fine of ₹200, with 5 additional days' simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid, emphasizing that substantive justice is better served through measured rather than severe punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case