THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs CHAMPABEN RAMESHBHAI CHUNARA — 154/2026

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: GJKH110001892026

e-Filing Number

16-02-2026

Filing Number

154/2026

Filing Date

24-Feb-2026

Registration No

154/2026

Registration Date

24-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

23

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.CHAMPABEN RAMESHBHAI CHUNARA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Judegement

    Case Summary: The State of Gujarat v. Champaben Rameshbhai Chunara (154/2026) The court convicted Champaben under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 4 liters of illicit liquor worth ₹800. Considering her status as a poor, first-time offender from a lower economic class who supports her family through daily labor, the court imposed a lenient sentence of imprisonment until trial completion plus a ₹200 fine instead of the statutorily prescribed stricter 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. 24-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 154/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The State of Gujarat v. Champaben Rameshbhai Chunara (154/2026) The court convicted Champaben under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 4 liters of illicit liquor worth ₹800. Considering her status as a poor, first-time offender from a lower economic class who supports her family through daily labor, the court imposed a lenient sentence of imprisonment until trial completion plus a ₹200 fine instead of the statutorily prescribed stricter 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