THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs KANCHANBEN RAMESHBHAI AMARSINH TALAPDA — 141/2026

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: GJKH110001762026

e-Filing Number

16-02-2026

Filing Number

141/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

141/2026

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

69

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.KANCHANBEN RAMESHBHAI AMARSINH TALAPDA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: 141/2026 The court convicted Kanchanben Rameshbhai Amarsinh Talapda under the Prohibition Act (Section 65) for possessing 5 liters of illegal liquor worth ₹1,000 on 03/02/2026. The accused pleaded guilty and sought leniency citing her poor economic status and family responsibilities. The court sentenced her to rigorous imprisonment until trial completion and imposed a fine of ₹200, with additional simple imprisonment if the fine remained unpaid, applying reduced sentencing given her personal circumstances and clean criminal record. 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. 141/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 141/2026 The court convicted Kanchanben Rameshbhai Amarsinh Talapda under the Prohibition Act (Section 65) for possessing 5 liters of illegal liquor worth ₹1,000 on 03/02/2026. The accused pleaded guilty and sought leniency citing her poor economic status and family responsibilities. The court sentenced her to rigorous imprisonment until trial completion and imposed a fine of ₹200, with additional simple imprisonment if the fine remained unpaid, applying reduced sentencing given her personal circumstances and clean criminal record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case