Government of Gujarat vs MAHEBUBBHAI SULEMANBHAI SUMARA — 538/2026

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: GJMR020006572026

Filing Number

538/2026

Filing Date

23-Jan-2026

Registration No

538/2026

Registration Date

23-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

2395

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.MAHEBUBBHAI SULEMANBHAI SUMARA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Summary The Gujarat High Court reduced the sentence of the accused convicted under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding that the trial court failed to consider mitigating circumstances including the accused's impoverished background, first-time offence, and commitment to reform. The court modified the sentence to three months imprisonment (from the original minimum term) plus a fine of ₹250, holding that courts must consider extenuating factors in the interest of justice. 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. 23-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 538/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Gujarat High Court reduced the sentence of the accused convicted under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding that the trial court failed to consider mitigating circumstances including the accused's impoverished background, first-time offence, and commitment to reform. The court modified the sentence to three months imprisonment (from the original minimum term) plus a fine of ₹250, holding that courts must consider extenuating factors in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case