THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs AASHABEN MAHESHBHAI CHUNARA — 120/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJAH090001982026

Case disposed

Filing Number

120/2026

Filing Date

20-01-2026

Registration No

120/2026

Registration Date

20-01-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SANAND

Judge

3-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

30th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11192015251185

Police Station

CHANGDODAR POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

AASHABEN MAHESHBHAI CHUNARA

Hearing History

Judge: 3-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

30-03-2026

Disposed

24-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

11-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

03-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

23-02-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

30-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary In Criminal Case No. 120/2026, the court acquitted the accused Aashaben Maheshbhai Chunara under Section 65(a)(a) of the IPC due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, as no independent corroborating evidence was produced against the accused, and the accused's absence during trial (invoking CrPC Section 299) prevented proper cross-examination of prosecution witnesses. Consequently, the first issue was decided in the negative (acquittal), and the accused was discharged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In Criminal Case No. 120/2026, the court acquitted the accused Aashaben Maheshbhai Chunara under Section 65(a)(a) of the IPC due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, as no independent corroborating evidence was produced against the accused, and the accused's absence during trial (invoking CrPC Section 299) prevented proper cross-examination of prosecution witnesses. Consequently, the first issue was decided in the negative (acquittal), and the accused was discharged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, SANAND All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case