THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs MADHIBEN SHAMBHUBHAI CHUNARA — 121/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAH090001992026
Filing Number
121/2026
Filing Date
20-01-2026
Registration No
121/2026
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
11192015251178
Police Station
CHANGDODAR POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
MADHIBEN SHAMBHUBHAI CHUNARA
Hearing History
Judge: 3-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 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
Case Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 121/2026, Sanad Court, Amdavad Decision: The court acquitted the accused, Madhiben Shambubhai Chunara, of charges under IPC Section 65(a)(a) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to produce independent witnesses or credible documentary evidence to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused's cross-examination could not be conducted due to his absence under CrPC Section 299. Key Reasoning: The court found that while prosecution witnesses were examined, their testimony alone could not sustain conviction without corroborating evidence, and no incriminating material was produced on record to establish the accused's guilt conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: Criminal Case No. 121/2026, Sanad Court, Amdavad Decision: The court acquitted the accused, Madhiben Shambubhai Chunara, of charges under IPC Section 65(a)(a) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to produce independent witnesses or credible documentary evidence to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt, and the accused's cross-examination could not be conducted due to his absence under CrPC Section 299. Key Reasoning: The court found that while prosecution witnesses were examined, their testimony alone could not sustain conviction without corroborating evidence, and no incriminating material was produced on record to establish the accused's guilt conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts