Government of Gujarat vs THAKOR DINESHJI KUVARJI — 47/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJPT020000602026

Filing Number

47/2026

Filing Date

02-Jan-2026

Registration No

47/2026

Registration Date

02-Jan-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT PATAN

Judge

11-Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 16-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11217019250320

Police Station

A DIVISION POLICE STATION - PATAN DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THAKOR DINESHJI KUVARJI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Patan convicted the accused, Dinesh Kunvarji Pradhan Thakore, under Section 65-AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for illegally possessing country liquor on 02/06/2025. The accused voluntarily pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a fine of ₹200 and 2 days simple imprisonment in default of fine, with lenient consideration given to his poor economic status and family responsibilities as a sole breadwinner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  5. 02-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 02-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 47/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Patan convicted the accused, Dinesh Kunvarji Pradhan Thakore, under Section 65-AA of the Gujarat Prohibition Act for illegally possessing country liquor on 02/06/2025. The accused voluntarily pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a fine of ₹200 and 2 days simple imprisonment in default of fine, with lenient consideration given to his poor economic status and family responsibilities as a sole breadwinner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case