GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT THE STATE vs RAMJU SIDDIQ SAMA Advocate - K N GAGIYA — 35/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT030000372026

Filing Number

35/2026

Filing Date

02-Jan-2026

Registration No

35/2026

Registration Date

02-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, MUNDRA

Judge

3-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

0384

Police Station

MUNDRA MARINE POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT THE STATE

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAMJU SIDDIQ SAMA Advocate - K N GAGIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted the accused under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 for an illicit liquor offense, accepting the accused's voluntary plea of guilt. Considering the accused's poor economic status, reformative theory of punishment, and circumstances, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 fine (or 15 days simple imprisonment in default) rather than maximum punishment, while directing forfeiture of seized contraband items. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Order

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 02-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 35/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 for an illicit liquor offense, accepting the accused's voluntary plea of guilt. Considering the accused's poor economic status, reformative theory of punishment, and circumstances, the court imposed a lenient sentence of Rs. 100 fine (or 15 days simple imprisonment in default) rather than maximum punishment, while directing forfeiture of seized contraband items. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case