Government of Gujarat vs JIGNESHBHAI RAMANBHAI GAMIT Advocate - P G GAMIT — 881/2026

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: GJTP060009562026

Filing Number

881/2026

Filing Date

05-Mar-2026

Registration No

881/2026

Registration Date

05-Mar-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

11824004253143

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.JIGNESHBHAI RAMANBHAI GAMIT Advocate - P G GAMIT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court granted the accused's plea bargaining petition under Section 265C of the CrPC, allowing him to plead guilty without admitting culpability while maintaining his innocence. The court sentenced him to imprisonment already served and imposed a fine of Rs. 500, while considering his conduct, age, and socio-economic circumstances, and directed that any prior sentence in this case be adjusted as per CrPC Section 428. 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

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 05-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 881/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court granted the accused's plea bargaining petition under Section 265C of the CrPC, allowing him to plead guilty without admitting culpability while maintaining his innocence. The court sentenced him to imprisonment already served and imposed a fine of Rs. 500, while considering his conduct, age, and socio-economic circumstances, and directed that any prior sentence in this case be adjusted as per CrPC Section 428. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case