Government of Gujarat vs KURESHI MAHEBUBMIYA ALIAS MEBLO NAVSADMIYA Advocate - F D JOSHI — 316/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposedSub Stage

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJMH030005632026

Filing Number

316/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

316/2026

Registration Date

23-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, KADI

Judge

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

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11206050250541

Police Station

NANDASAN POLICE STATION - MAHESANA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185
Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KURESHI MAHEBUBMIYA ALIAS MEBLO NAVSADMIYA Advocate - F D JOSHI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Judegement

    Case Summary The court found the accused, Kureshi Mehbubbiyaan, guilty under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act and Section 66(1)B of the Prohibition Act. Considering the accused's poor economic background as the sole breadwinner of his family, the court imposed a reduced sentence of Rs. 700 fine with 3 days simple imprisonment in default, rather than the statutory maximum penalty. 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. 10-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 23-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 316/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The court found the accused, Kureshi Mehbubbiyaan, guilty under Section 185 of the Motor Vehicles Act and Section 66(1)B of the Prohibition Act. Considering the accused's poor economic background as the sole breadwinner of his family, the court imposed a reduced sentence of Rs. 700 fine with 3 days simple imprisonment in default, rather than the statutory maximum penalty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case