Government of Gujarat vs THAKOR RAJIBEN VINUJI SHIVAJI — 102/2026

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: GJMH050001662026

Filing Number

102/2026

Filing Date

09-Feb-2026

Registration No

102/2026

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

11206023260022

Police Station

KHERALU POLICE STATION- MEHSANA DISTRICT

Year

2026

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 RAJIBEN VINUJI SHIVAJI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Summary The court acquitted the accused under Section 85(1) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act (drunk and disorderly conduct) but convicted him under Section 66(1)(b) of the same Act (consumption/possession of intoxicants) as amended in 2016. The court imposed a fine of Rs. 100 with 10 days simple imprisonment in the alternative, finding sufficient evidence of intoxicant consumption during the first offense, while noting the accused's remorse and lack of prior criminal history as mitigating factors. 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. 102/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused under Section 85(1) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act (drunk and disorderly conduct) but convicted him under Section 66(1)(b) of the same Act (consumption/possession of intoxicants) as amended in 2016. The court imposed a fine of Rs. 100 with 10 days simple imprisonment in the alternative, finding sufficient evidence of intoxicant consumption during the first offense, while noting the accused's remorse and lack of prior criminal history as mitigating factors. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case