Government of Gujarat vs SIKANDARBHAI URFE SIKALO KASAMBHAI SANDHAVANI — 443/2026

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: GJMR020005482026

Filing Number

443/2026

Filing Date

21-Jan-2026

Registration No

443/2026

Registration Date

21-Jan-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT, MORBI

Judge

3-2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 05-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

1822

Police Station

MORBI TALUKA POLICE STATION - MORBI 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.SIKANDARBHAI URFE SIKALO KASAMBHAI SANDHAVANI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing alcohol without a permit and upheld the conviction. However, the court reduced the sentence from three months imprisonment to a fine of Rs. 250, considering the accused's extenuating circumstances (first-time offender, from poor background, family dependent on him) and holding that the lower court had failed to consider these relevant factors while imposing the original sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    Order

    2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.

  5. 28-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 21-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 443/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing alcohol without a permit and upheld the conviction. However, the court reduced the sentence from three months imprisonment to a fine of Rs. 250, considering the accused's extenuating circumstances (first-time offender, from poor background, family dependent on him) and holding that the lower court had failed to consider these relevant factors while imposing the original sentence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case