THE STATE vs ALPESHBHAI ARVINDBHAI RATHVA Advocate - S D BARIA — 59/2026
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJPM070000602026
Filing Number
59/2026
Filing Date
23-Jan-2026
Registration No
59/2026
Registration Date
23-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, JAMBUGHODA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Last updated 07-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
379
Police Station
JAMBUGHODA POLICE STATION - PANCHMAHALS DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.ALPESHBHAI ARVINDBHAI RATHVA Advocate - S D BARIA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court found Alpeshbhai Arvindbhai Rathva guilty of violating the Motor Vehicles Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)B. Considering his plea for leniency, his status as the sole earner for a poor family with dependents, his remorse, and this being his first offense, the court imposed a lenient sentence: a fine of ₹2,000 (with 3 days simple imprisonment if unpaid) instead of the statutory minimum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Mar-2026
Plea
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Feb-2026
Plea
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
18-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
03-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 59/2026
The court found Alpeshbhai Arvindbhai Rathva guilty of violating the Motor Vehicles Act Section 185 and Prohibition Act Section 66(1)B. Considering his plea for leniency, his status as the sole earner for a poor family with dependents, his remorse, and this being his first offense, the court imposed a lenient sentence: a fine of ₹2,000 (with 3 days simple imprisonment if unpaid) instead of the statutory minimum. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts