THE GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs SARIF FAKIRMAMAD CHAUHAN — 247/2026

Case under Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT040003342026

Filing Number

247/2026

Filing Date

28-Feb-2026

Registration No

247/2026

Registration Date

28-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, MANDVI

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

505

Police Station

MANDVI POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SARIF FAKIRMAMAD CHAUHAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Mandvi First Class Magistrate's Court convicted the accused under IPC Section 65-A (Prohibition Act offense) and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 with an alternative imprisonment of 2 days if the fine remains unpaid. The court accepted the accused's plea for leniency, considering it as a first offense with no prior criminal history, and imposed the minimum prescribed punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 14-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 28-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 28-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 247/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Mandvi First Class Magistrate's Court convicted the accused under IPC Section 65-A (Prohibition Act offense) and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 with an alternative imprisonment of 2 days if the fine remains unpaid. The court accepted the accused's plea for leniency, considering it as a first offense with no prior criminal history, and imposed 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