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

Case disposed

Filing Number

4523/2021

Filing Date

02-12-2021

Registration No

939/2021

Registration Date

02-12-2021

Court

DJ Div. Banka

Judge

19-Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1

Decision Date

08th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ACQUITTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

70

Police Station

JAIPUR

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2016 Section 30(a)

Petitioner(s)

Balbir bilachan

Adv. Special P.p

Respondent(s)

Sunil hembram

Hearing History

Judge: 19-Exclusive Special Court of Excise Act No. 1

08-04-2026

Disposed

06-04-2026

ARGUMENTS

25-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

11-03-2026

EVIDENCE

24-02-2026

EVIDENCE

Final Orders / Judgements

08-04-2026
Acquittal

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

DJ Div. Banka All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case