GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs PARMAR DINESHBHAI RATNABHAI — 288/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJMH120003922026

Filing Number

288/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

288/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, UNJHA

Judge

2-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11206078260028

Police Station

UNAVA POLICE STATION- MAHESANA DISTRICT

Year

2026

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.PARMAR DINESHBHAI RATNABHAI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Judicial Magistrate First Class Court in Unjha convicted the accused under BMVSS Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) for driving under the influence of alcohol without a valid permit. The court sentenced the accused to a fine of Rs. 1,100 (Rs. 1,000 for each offense) with seven days simple imprisonment in default of payment, considering the accused's economic circumstances and family responsibilities as mitigating factors for imposing a lesser sentence than the maximum prescribed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 288/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Judicial Magistrate First Class Court in Unjha convicted the accused under BMVSS Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) for driving under the influence of alcohol without a valid permit. The court sentenced the accused to a fine of Rs. 1,100 (Rs. 1,000 for each offense) with seven days simple imprisonment in default of payment, considering the accused's economic circumstances and family responsibilities as mitigating factors for imposing a lesser sentence than the maximum prescribed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case