Government of Gujarat vs BHAVESHBHAI RATANBHAI TADVI — 85/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185,3,181. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 12th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNR040001012026

e-Filing Number

16-04-2025

Filing Number

85/2026

Filing Date

22-Jan-2026

Registration No

85/2026

Registration Date

22-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEDIAPADA

Judge

2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

12-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11823004250289

Police Station

DEDIAPADA POLICE STATION- NARMADA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185,3,181

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)(b)

Petitioner(s)

1.Government of Gujarat

Respondent(s)

1.BHAVESHBHAI RATANBHAI TADVI

Case History

Case disposedDisposed
12-Mar-2026

OrderView PDF

The court convicted the accused of offenses under the IPC and Prohibition Act, sentencing him to imprisonment of 6 months and a fine of Rs. 600, with an additional 5 days simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid. The court considered the accused's confession, first-time offense, poor socioeconomic status, and expressions of remorse while imposing a lenient sentence below the maximum prescribed punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
12-Mar-2026

Disposed

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. 85/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused of offenses under the IPC and Prohibition Act, sentencing him to imprisonment of 6 months and a fine of Rs. 600, with an additional 5 days simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid. The court considered the accused's confession, first-time offense, poor socioeconomic status, and expressions of remorse while imposing a lenient sentence below the maximum prescribed punishment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.