Government of Gujarat vs DANIYELBHAI BALUBHAI GAMIT Advocate - G V VASAVA — 914/2026

Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185,. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJTP060009912026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

914/2026

Filing Date

05-03-2026

Registration No

914/2026

Registration Date

05-03-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SONGADH

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

FIR Details

FIR Number

11824004252563

Police Station

SONGADH POLICE STATION - TAPI DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Section 185,
GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

DANIYELBHAI BALUBHAI GAMIT Advocate - G V VASAVA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

14-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

SUMMONS - NOTICE

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

The Gujarat High Court approved the accused's plea bargaining application under Section 265C of the CrPC, allowing conviction without admission of guilt while maintaining innocence—a concept modeled on the "Alford plea" recognized in US jurisprudence. The court sentenced the accused to imprisonment already undergone and a fine of Rs. 500, considering the socio-economic circumstances and the non-heinous nature of the offense, while directing the court to explore feasibility of incorporating such "mutually satisfactory disposition" provisions within existing legal frameworks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Gujarat High Court approved the accused's plea bargaining application under Section 265C of the CrPC, allowing conviction without admission of guilt while maintaining innocence—a concept modeled on the "Alford plea" recognized in US jurisprudence. The court sentenced the accused to imprisonment already undergone and a fine of Rs. 500, considering the socio-economic circumstances and the non-heinous nature of the offense, while directing the court to explore feasibility of incorporating such "mutually satisfactory disposition" provisions within existing legal frameworks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, SONGADH All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case