Government of Gujarat vs RANJIT MUNNABHAI DEVIPUJAK — 604/2026

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: GJSR070006862026

e-Filing Number

29-01-2026

Filing Number

604/2026

Filing Date

23-Feb-2026

Registration No

604/2026

Registration Date

23-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, BARDOLI

Judge

4-Addi 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

11214008260024

Police Station

BARDOLI POLICE STATION - SURAT DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RANJIT MUNNABHAI DEVIPUJAK

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Case Summary The Bardoli Judicial Magistrate Court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and Gujarat Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2017, Sections 66(1)(b) and 85(1). The court imposed a lenient sentence of a fine of ₹200 (or 3 days simple imprisonment in default) instead of the minimum prescribed punishment, considering the accused's early guilty plea, economic hardship, and the principle of proportionality of sentence to avoid wastage of court resources and time. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 23-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 604/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Bardoli Judicial Magistrate Court convicted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and Gujarat Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2017, Sections 66(1)(b) and 85(1). The court imposed a lenient sentence of a fine of ₹200 (or 3 days simple imprisonment in default) instead of the minimum prescribed punishment, considering the accused's early guilty plea, economic hardship, and the principle of proportionality of sentence to avoid wastage of court resources and time. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case