Government of Gujarat vs THAKOR LAXMIBEN DIVANJI RAVAJI — 98/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJMH050001622026

Filing Number

98/2026

Filing Date

09-Feb-2026

Registration No

98/2026

Registration Date

09-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, KHERALU

Judge

2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11206023250621

Police Station

KHERALU POLICE STATION- MEHSANA 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.THAKOR LAXMIBEN DIVANJI RAVAJI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court acquitted the accused under Section 85(1) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, finding insufficient evidence that the accused was drunk and created a public nuisance as required by law. The court instead convicted the accused under Section 66(1)(b) of the same Act for consumption of intoxicants, sentencing him to imprisonment up to 10 days and a fine of ₹100, as the prosecution failed to establish all essential elements of the original charge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 09-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 98/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court acquitted the accused under Section 85(1) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, finding insufficient evidence that the accused was drunk and created a public nuisance as required by law. The court instead convicted the accused under Section 66(1)(b) of the same Act for consumption of intoxicants, sentencing him to imprisonment up to 10 days and a fine of ₹100, as the prosecution failed to establish all essential elements of the original charge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case