Government of Gujarat vs RAMESHBHAI MANGABHAI VASAVA Advocate - S R VASAVA — 130/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 85,66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJSR100001352026

Filing Number

130/2026

Filing Date

06-Mar-2026

Registration No

130/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, UMARPADA

Judge

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

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 22-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAMESHBHAI MANGABHAI VASAVA Advocate - S R VASAVA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Principal Civil Court of Meherbaan Umarpada convicted the accused Rameshbhai Mangabhai under Section 66-1-B of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (formerly IPC Section 85) for a general offense. Considering the accused's financial hardship, status as the sole earner, remorse, and voluntary confession, the court sentenced him to simple imprisonment until the court rose (minimal period) and imposed a fine of ₹200, with an alternative of 2 days simple imprisonment if the fine remained unpaid. 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. 06-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 130/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Principal Civil Court of Meherbaan Umarpada convicted the accused Rameshbhai Mangabhai under Section 66-1-B of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (formerly IPC Section 85) for a general offense. Considering the accused's financial hardship, status as the sole earner, remorse, and voluntary confession, the court sentenced him to simple imprisonment until the court rose (minimal period) and imposed a fine of ₹200, with an alternative of 2 days simple imprisonment if the fine remained unpaid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case