Government of Gujarat vs RASULBHAI DADABHAI MOVAR — 446/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMR020005512026
Filing Number
446/2026
Filing Date
21-Jan-2026
Registration No
446/2026
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
1816
Police Station
MORBI TALUKA POLICE STATION - MORBI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.RASULBHAI DADABHAI MOVAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Order
The Gujarat High Court reduced the sentence of the accused convicted under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65AA, from three months imprisonment to a fine of Rs. 200, considering the extenuating circumstances (poor economic status, first-time offender, family responsibilities) that were not adequately considered by the lower court. The court held that courts have discretion to impose lenient sentences when mitigating factors are genuinely present and substantiated, in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
10-Mar-2026
Order
2nd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge And A.C.J.M.
-
28-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
21-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 446/2026
The Gujarat High Court reduced the sentence of the accused convicted under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65AA, from three months imprisonment to a fine of Rs. 200, considering the extenuating circumstances (poor economic status, first-time offender, family responsibilities) that were not adequately considered by the lower court. The court held that courts have discretion to impose lenient sentences when mitigating factors are genuinely present and substantiated, in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts