THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs RAJNIKANT SO SURESHBHAI MAGANBHAI THAKOR — 994/2025

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: GJKH110013922025

e-Filing Number

21-11-2025

Filing Number

994/2025

Filing Date

25-Nov-2025

Registration No

994/2025

Registration Date

25-Nov-2025

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 23-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

623

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.RAJNIKANT SO SURESHBHAI MAGANBHAI THAKOR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Judegement

    Summary: The court convicted the accused under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 10 liters of illicit liquor worth ₹2,000. Considering the accused's poverty, family dependence, and first-time offense, the court imposed a lenient sentence of imprisonment until trial completion and a fine of ₹200 (instead of maximum penalties), emphasizing that justice is best served through compassionate sentencing rather than harsh 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. 09-Mar-2026

    Plea

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  5. 12-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 25-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 994/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court convicted the accused under Section 65 of the Prohibition Act for possessing 10 liters of illicit liquor worth ₹2,000. Considering the accused's poverty, family dependence, and first-time offense, the court imposed a lenient sentence of imprisonment until trial completion and a fine of ₹200 (instead of maximum penalties), emphasizing that justice is best served through compassionate sentencing rather than harsh 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