Government of Gujarat vs AKSHAYKUMAR SUKHDEVPRATAP RAJBHAR — 96/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B,85(1). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 08th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJMH110001282026

Filing Number

96/2026

Filing Date

23-Mar-2026

Registration No

96/2026

Registration Date

23-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SATLASANA

Judge

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

Decision Date

08-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 15-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11206062260101

Police Station

SATLASANA POLICE STATION- MEHSANA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B,85(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AKSHAYKUMAR SUKHDEVPRATAP RAJBHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case 96/2026 Summary The court convicted Akshaykumar Sukhdevpratap Rajbhar under the Gujarat Prohibition Act for consuming alcohol and possessing liquor in Satlasana village. Recognizing the accused's poverty, first-time offense, and role as sole family earner, the court reduced the sentence to a fine of ₹250 and 6 months imprisonment (instead of the minimum 3-month mandatory term), exercising discretion based on extenuating circumstances and justice principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 04-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 96/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case 96/2026 Summary The court convicted Akshaykumar Sukhdevpratap Rajbhar under the Gujarat Prohibition Act for consuming alcohol and possessing liquor in Satlasana village. Recognizing the accused's poverty, first-time offense, and role as sole family earner, the court reduced the sentence to a fine of ₹250 and 6 months imprisonment (instead of the minimum 3-month mandatory term), exercising discretion based on extenuating circumstances and justice principles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case