Government of Gujarat vs HARESH JETHALAL RATHOD — 2709/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT020047502025

Filing Number

2709/2025

Filing Date

12-Jun-2025

Registration No

2709/2025

Registration Date

12-Jun-2025

Court

CIVIL COURT BHUJ

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11205039250181

Police Station

BHUJ TALUKA POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.HARESH JETHALAL RATHOD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under Section 65(1)(f) of the Prohibition Act for illegal liquor possession and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 (or 2 days simple imprisonment in default). The court considered the accused's voluntary confession, first-time offense, and clean criminal record as mitigating factors while imposing the minimum prescribed punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Plea

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  5. 05-Feb-2026

    Plea

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  6. 19-Nov-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  7. 29-Sep-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge

  8. 14-Jul-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 12-Jun-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2709/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under Section 65(1)(f) of the Prohibition Act for illegal liquor possession and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 (or 2 days simple imprisonment in default). The court considered the accused's voluntary confession, first-time offense, and clean criminal record as mitigating factors while imposing the minimum prescribed 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