THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs KISHANBHAI VAHARIYABHAI VASAVA — 182/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)(B),85(1). Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR030002102026

e-Filing Number

09-10-2025

Filing Number

182/2026

Filing Date

30-Jan-2026

Registration No

182/2026

Registration Date

30-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SAGBARA

Judge

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

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 03-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823021251109

Police Station

SAGBARA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)(B),85(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KISHANBHAI VAHARIYABHAI VASAVA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court convicted the accused under Section 66(1)(B) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 for drug-related offenses, and discharged him under Section 85(1) after the accused voluntarily pleaded guilty. The court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹200 fine (or 2 days simple imprisonment in default), considering the accused's poverty, first-time offense, family responsibilities, and relevant Supreme Court principles against harsh penalties for economically disadvantaged persons. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 07-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 30-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 182/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused under Section 66(1)(B) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 for drug-related offenses, and discharged him under Section 85(1) after the accused voluntarily pleaded guilty. The court imposed a lenient sentence of ₹200 fine (or 2 days simple imprisonment in default), considering the accused's poverty, first-time offense, family responsibilities, and relevant Supreme Court principles against harsh penalties for economically disadvantaged persons. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case