Government of Gujarat vs RAJBHAI URFE JIGLO BHIMJIBHAI ADRESHA — 8821/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJMR020108682025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
8821/2025
Filing Date
11-11-2025
Registration No
8821/2025
Registration Date
11-11-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT, MORBI
Judge
3-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
FIR Details
FIR Number
1171
Police Station
MORBI A DIV POLICE STATION- MORBI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
RAJBHAI URFE JIGLO BHIMJIBHAI ADRESHA
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND A.C.J.M.
Disposed
ORDER
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | ORDER | |
| 28-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED | |
| 12-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED | |
| 28-11-2025 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing illicit liquor without a permit, but reduced the sentence considering extenuating circumstances such as the accused's poor economic status, family responsibilities, and it being a first offense. The court imposed a sentence of imprisonment until the disposal of the appeal plus a fine of ₹250, with seven days simple imprisonment as default punishment, following the principle that special and adequate reasons need not be recorded for imposing lesser sentences when circumstances of justice warrant it. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Gujarat High Court convicted the accused under Section 65AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing illicit liquor without a permit, but reduced the sentence considering extenuating circumstances such as the accused's poor economic status, family responsibilities, and it being a first offense. The court imposed a sentence of imprisonment until the disposal of the appeal plus a fine of ₹250, with seven days simple imprisonment as default punishment, following the principle that special and adequate reasons need not be recorded for imposing lesser sentences when circumstances of justice warrant it. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts