Government of Gujarat vs SHAILESHBHAI MOHANBHAI PARMAR Advocate - K B CHAUHAN — 194/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 18th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJMR050002282026

Filing Number

194/2026

Filing Date

17-Mar-2026

Registration No

194/2026

Registration Date

17-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, TANKARA

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C

Decision Date

18-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11189006260173

Police Station

TANKARA POLICE STATION - MORBI DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A)

Petitioner(s)

1.Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

1.SHAILESHBHAI MOHANBHAI PARMAR Advocate - K B CHAUHAN

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
18-Apr-2026

Judegement

Case Summary: Criminal Case No. 194/2026 The court found accused Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Parmar guilty under Section 65-A of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, after he voluntarily confessed to the charges. Considering his circumstances as a first-time offender from an impoverished background with family responsibilities and genuine remorse, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹100 fine. The seized contraband was ordered to be disposed of according to legal procedure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
18-Apr-2026

Disposed

Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
13-Apr-2026

Process To Accused

Principal CIVIL Judge And J.M.F.C
17-Mar-2026

First hearing

Initial hearing scheduled
17-Mar-2026

Case filed

Registration No. 194/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Criminal Case No. 194/2026 The court found accused Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Parmar guilty under Section 65-A of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, after he voluntarily confessed to the charges. Considering his circumstances as a first-time offender from an impoverished background with family responsibilities and genuine remorse, the court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹100 fine. The seized contraband was ordered to be disposed of according to legal procedure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.