Government of Gujarat vs MAHENDRABHAI GOVINDBHAI TADVI Advocate - J R TADVI — 70/2026

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR040000862026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

23-04-2025

Filing Number

70/2026

Filing Date

22-01-2026

Registration No

70/2026

Registration Date

22-01-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEDIAPADA

Judge

2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823004250110

Police Station

DEDIAPADA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 85(1)

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Respondent(s)

MAHENDRABHAI GOVINDBHAI TADVI Advocate - J R TADVI

Hearing History

Judge: 2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

14-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

PLEA

10-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

03-02-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 56(1) for theft committed during daytime and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 (or 5 days simple imprisonment in default), considering his voluntary confession, first-time offense, poor economic background, and family dependency. The judgment applied sentencing principles established in the State of Gujarat v. Hirachand case, imposing lenient punishment rather than the maximum penalty given the mitigating circumstances presented by the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused under IPC Section 56(1) for theft committed during daytime and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 (or 5 days simple imprisonment in default), considering his voluntary confession, first-time offense, poor economic background, and family dependency. The judgment applied sentencing principles established in the State of Gujarat v. Hirachand case, imposing lenient punishment rather than the maximum penalty given the mitigating circumstances presented by the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, DEDIAPADA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case