THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs SANTOSHBHAI BHIMATIYABHAI VASAVA — 449/2026

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: GJNR030005222026

e-Filing Number

07-01-2026

Filing Number

449/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

449/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-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 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823021251544

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

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SANTOSHBHAI BHIMATIYABHAI VASAVA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court found the accused guilty under Section 66(1)(b) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, and sentenced him to a fine of ₹200 with 2 days simple imprisonment in default of payment. The court imposed lenient punishment considering the accused's voluntary confession, first-time offense, financial hardship as a laborer, and family responsibilities, following established principles of the High Court and Supreme Court on proportionate sentencing. 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. 10-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 449/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court found the accused guilty under Section 66(1)(b) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, and sentenced him to a fine of ₹200 with 2 days simple imprisonment in default of payment. The court imposed lenient punishment considering the accused's voluntary confession, first-time offense, financial hardship as a laborer, and family responsibilities, following established principles of the High Court and Supreme Court on proportionate sentencing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case