Government of Gujarat vs RAMESHBHAI VECHANBHAI VASAVA — 172/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65aa,. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJSR050003122026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
172/2026
Filing Date
18-02-2026
Registration No
172/2026
Registration Date
18-02-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANGROL
Judge
4-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
RAMESHBHAI VECHANBHAI VASAVA
Hearing History
Judge: 4-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 06-03-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED | |
| 18-02-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court convicted the accused under Section 65 AA of the Prohibition Act after the accused voluntarily confessed to the crime and expressed remorse. Citing the principle that lesser punishment is justified when there are sufficient reasons and considering the accused's voluntary confession and commitment to reform, the court sentenced the accused to imprisonment until rising of court and imposed a fine of Rs. 200, with one day simple imprisonment as an alternative if the fine remains unpaid. Seized valuable items were ordered to be returned to their rightful owner or forfeited to the government as per regulations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court convicted the accused under Section 65 AA of the Prohibition Act after the accused voluntarily confessed to the crime and expressed remorse. Citing the principle that lesser punishment is justified when there are sufficient reasons and considering the accused's voluntary confession and commitment to reform, the court sentenced the accused to imprisonment until rising of court and imposed a fine of Rs. 200, with one day simple imprisonment as an alternative if the fine remains unpaid. Seized valuable items were ordered to be returned to their rightful owner or forfeited to the government as per regulations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts