RUTURAJBHAI JOGABHAI vs SUREKHABEN SANJAYBHAI HALPATI — 693/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJNV020008462026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

693/2026

Filing Date

17-01-2026

Registration No

693/2026

Registration Date

17-01-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT, NAVSARI

Judge

8-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

RUTURAJBHAI JOGABHAI

Respondent(s)

SUREKHABEN SANJAYBHAI HALPATI

Hearing History

Judge: 8-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

14-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

31-01-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

Case Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Navsari convicted the accused, Surekhabhen Sanjayabhai Halpati, under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing contraband liquor without proper permit. The accused voluntarily confessed to the crime in court, which the judge found credible and admissible. Considering the accused's poor economic circumstances, remorse, and the voluntary confession, the court imposed a lenient sentence of a ₹200 fine with an alternative of 3 days simple imprisonment, rather than the mandatory minimum punishment prescribed by law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of Navsari convicted the accused, Surekhabhen Sanjayabhai Halpati, under Section 65(A)(A) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for possessing contraband liquor without proper permit. The accused voluntarily confessed to the crime in court, which the judge found credible and admissible. Considering the accused's poor economic circumstances, remorse, and the voluntary confession, the court imposed a lenient sentence of a ₹200 fine with an alternative of 3 days simple imprisonment, rather than the mandatory minimum punishment prescribed by law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CIVIL COURT, NAVSARI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case