Government of Gujarat vs SATISHBHAI BABUBHAI GAMIT — 303/2026
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJTP020004272026
e-Filing Number
06-12-2025
Filing Number
303/2026
Filing Date
23-Feb-2026
Registration No
303/2026
Registration Date
23-Feb-2026
Court
CIVIL COURT, VYARA
Judge
2-Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY
Last updated 23-Apr-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
2049
Police Station
VYARA POLICE STATION - TAPI DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.SATISHBHAI BABUBHAI GAMIT
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Court Decision Summary Criminal Case No. 303/2026 (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vyara) The court convicted the accused under both the IPC Section 185 (driving under alcohol influence) and the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b), sentencing him to 6 months imprisonment and/or a fine of Rs. 1,000, with additional sentencing under Section 128 CrPC. The court found the accused voluntarily admitted to consuming alcohol in public without a permit, rejected his claims of no prior offense due to poverty, and determined that while the IPC offense alone would be non-cognizable, the Prohibition Act charge renders the combined case cognizable and triable by the Magistrate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 303/2026
Court Decision Summary Criminal Case No. 303/2026 (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vyara) The court convicted the accused under both the IPC Section 185 (driving under alcohol influence) and the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b), sentencing him to 6 months imprisonment and/or a fine of Rs. 1,000, with additional sentencing under Section 128 CrPC. The court found the accused voluntarily admitted to consuming alcohol in public without a permit, rejected his claims of no prior offense due to poverty, and determined that while the IPC offense alone would be non-cognizable, the Prohibition Act charge renders the combined case cognizable and triable by the Magistrate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts