THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ASHOKBHAI S/O DEVJIBHAI JANTARBHAI GAVDA Advocate - S S PATEL — 143/2026

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: GJNV120002302026

Filing Number

143/2026

Filing Date

02-Mar-2026

Registration No

143/2026

Registration Date

02-Mar-2026

Court

Taluka Court, Khergam

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11822004250946

Police Station

KHERGAM POLICE STATION - NAVSARI DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B,85(1)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ASHOKBHAI S/O DEVJIBHAI JANTARBHAI GAVDA Advocate - S S PATEL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The court convicted the accused under Gujarat Prohibition Act sections 65(1) and 56(1) for illegal possession and consumption of alcohol, sentencing him to 6 months imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs. 100 (with an additional 1-day jail term if fine remains unpaid). The court found the prosecution's evidence credible and rejected the accused's defense, holding him guilty based on the testimony and material evidence presented. 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. 09-Mar-2026

    Lok Adalat

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 02-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 02-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 143/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court convicted the accused under Gujarat Prohibition Act sections 65(1) and 56(1) for illegal possession and consumption of alcohol, sentencing him to 6 months imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs. 100 (with an additional 1-day jail term if fine remains unpaid). The court found the prosecution's evidence credible and rejected the accused's defense, holding him guilty based on the testimony and material evidence presented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case