THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs TARSHIBHAI BHIKHABHAI KOLI Advocate - S D GADHVI — 383/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJKT100006002026

Filing Number

383/2026

Filing Date

11-Mar-2026

Registration No

383/2026

Registration Date

11-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, ANJAR

Judge

13-2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11993014260038

Police Station

DUDHAI POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.TARSHIBHAI BHIKHABHAI KOLI Advocate - S D GADHVI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted the accused Tarshbhai Bhikhabhai Koli under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act based on his voluntary confession, finding it genuine and lawful. The court sentenced him to imprisonment until the rising of the court with a fine of Rs. 500, or in default, 2 days simple imprisonment, exercising discretion to impose a lighter sentence considering his circumstances as a poor man with family responsibilities and this being his first offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 383/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused Tarshbhai Bhikhabhai Koli under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act based on his voluntary confession, finding it genuine and lawful. The court sentenced him to imprisonment until the rising of the court with a fine of Rs. 500, or in default, 2 days simple imprisonment, exercising discretion to impose a lighter sentence considering his circumstances as a poor man with family responsibilities and this being his first offense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case