Government of Gujarat vs SANJAYBHAI SAMUBHAI VASAVA — 52/2026
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 13th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJNR040000682026
e-Filing Number
25-07-2025
Filing Number
52/2026
Filing Date
22-Jan-2026
Registration No
52/2026
Registration Date
22-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, DEDIAPADA
Judge
2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Last updated 06-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11823004250688
Police Station
DEDIAPADA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Respondent(s)
-
1.SANJAYBHAI SAMUBHAI VASAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 248(2) and 55(1) for theft, considering his confession, poverty, first-time offender status, and family dependence, sentencing him to Rs. 200 fine with a default of 5 days simple imprisonment. The judgment emphasized that while the accused's confession and circumstances warranted lighter punishment, the principles of justice required balancing rehabilitation with appropriate deterrence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
12-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
10-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
03-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
22-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 52/2026
The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 248(2) and 55(1) for theft, considering his confession, poverty, first-time offender status, and family dependence, sentencing him to Rs. 200 fine with a default of 5 days simple imprisonment. The judgment emphasized that while the accused's confession and circumstances warranted lighter punishment, the principles of justice required balancing rehabilitation with appropriate deterrence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts