Government of Gujarat vs KAMLESHBHAI BASIRBHAI GAMIT Advocate - A S GAMIT — 441/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJTP060004942026

Filing Number

441/2026

Filing Date

13-Feb-2026

Registration No

441/2026

Registration Date

13-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SONGADH

Judge

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

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11824004252024

Police Station

SONGADH POLICE STATION - TAPI DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KAMLESHBHAI BASIRBHAI GAMIT Advocate - A S GAMIT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    SUMMARY: The Surat First Class Judicial Magistrate Court convicted the accused under IPC Section 275 (adulteration of medicine) under the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The court imposed a fine of Rs. 500, with an alternative imprisonment of 6 days if the fine remains unpaid. The court exercised leniency considering the accused's impoverished status, family responsibilities, and the reformative purpose of criminal law. 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. 09-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 03-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 19-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 13-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 441/2026

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The Surat First Class Judicial Magistrate Court convicted the accused under IPC Section 275 (adulteration of medicine) under the Gujarat Prohibition Act. The court imposed a fine of Rs. 500, with an alternative imprisonment of 6 days if the fine remains unpaid. The court exercised leniency considering the accused's impoverished status, family responsibilities, and the reformative purpose of criminal law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case