THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs MAHENDRABHAI PUNAMBHAI CHUNARA — 160/2026

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: GJKH110001952026

e-Filing Number

16-02-2026

Filing Number

160/2026

Filing Date

24-Feb-2026

Registration No

160/2026

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

44

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.MAHENDRABHAI PUNAMBHAI CHUNARA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: 160/2026 The court convicted Mahendrabhai Punambhai Chunara under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 4 liters of liquor valued at ₹800 seized during a police check. The defendant pleaded guilty and sought lenient sentencing, citing his status as a poor laborer supporting his family. The court, considering the defendant's first-time offense, impoverished background, and voluntary confession, imposed a reduced sentence of simple imprisonment up to the period already served and a fine of ₹200, rather than the statutory maximum punishment, balancing justice with humanitarian considerations. 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. 160/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 160/2026 The court convicted Mahendrabhai Punambhai Chunara under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 4 liters of liquor valued at ₹800 seized during a police check. The defendant pleaded guilty and sought lenient sentencing, citing his status as a poor laborer supporting his family. The court, considering the defendant's first-time offense, impoverished background, and voluntary confession, imposed a reduced sentence of simple imprisonment up to the period already served and a fine of ₹200, rather than the statutory maximum punishment, balancing justice with humanitarian considerations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case