Balbir bilachan vs Sunil hembram — 939/2021
Case under Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2016 Section 30(a). Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 08th April 2026.
Spl. case for Excise Act.
CNR: BRBA010050822021
Filing Number
4523/2021
Filing Date
02-Dec-2021
Registration No
939/2021
Registration Date
02-Dec-2021
Court
DJ Div. Banka
Judge
19-Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
Decision Date
08-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Last updated 17-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
70
Police Station
JAIPUR
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Balbir bilachan
Adv. Special P.p
Respondent(s)
-
1.Sunil hembram
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-Apr-2026
AcquittalView PDF
Summary: The Special Excise Court acquitted accused Sunil Hembram of charges under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted the prosecution examined only one witness (the informant) and failed to produce corroborating witnesses despite multiple opportunities, with key witnesses never appearing in court. Due to insufficient evidence and credibility issues with the sole witness's testimony regarding the recovery of 10 liters of illicit liquor, the accused was given the benefit of doubt and discharged along with his sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Apr-2026
Disposed
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
06-Apr-2026
Arguments
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
25-Mar-2026
Arguments
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
11-Mar-2026
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
24-Feb-2026
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
18-Feb-2026
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
09-Feb-2026
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
16-Dec-2025
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
09-Oct-2025
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
25-Jul-2025
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
02-May-2025
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
24-Feb-2025
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
18-Dec-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
23-Oct-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
18-Sep-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
05-Aug-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
24-Jun-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
14-May-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
02-Apr-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
05-Feb-2024
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
07-Dec-2023
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
11-Oct-2023
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
11-Sep-2023
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
03-Aug-2023
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
17-Jun-2023
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
26-Apr-2023
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
18-Feb-2023
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
21-Dec-2022
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
07-Nov-2022
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
07-Sep-2022
Evidence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
24-Aug-2022
Appearence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
13-Jun-2022
Appearence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
29-Apr-2022
Appearence
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
10-Mar-2022
Hearing
Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1
-
16-Dec-2021
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Dec-2021
Case filed
Registration No. 939/2021
Summary: The Special Excise Court acquitted accused Sunil Hembram of charges under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted the prosecution examined only one witness (the informant) and failed to produce corroborating witnesses despite multiple opportunities, with key witnesses never appearing in court. Due to insufficient evidence and credibility issues with the sole witness's testimony regarding the recovery of 10 liters of illicit liquor, the accused was given the benefit of doubt and discharged along with his sureties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts