THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ASHOKBHAI RATILAL CHUNARA — 151/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAH090002332026
Filing Number
151/2026
Filing Date
20-01-2026
Registration No
151/2026
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
11192015251192
Police Station
CHANGDODAR POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
ASHOKBHAI RATILAL 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
Summary The court acquitted the accused (Ashoklal Chunara) in Criminal Case No. 151/2026 under IPC Section 65(a)(a), finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court reasoned that the prosecution failed to provide credible independent witness testimony—the two panchayat witnesses who testified could not properly support the evidence due to procedural defects, and the accused's cross-examination was not conducted as required under CrPC Section 299 (trial in absence of absconded accused). Consequently, the charges were not substantiated, and the accused was acquitted and discharged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court acquitted the accused (Ashoklal Chunara) in Criminal Case No. 151/2026 under IPC Section 65(a)(a), finding insufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The court reasoned that the prosecution failed to provide credible independent witness testimony—the two panchayat witnesses who testified could not properly support the evidence due to procedural defects, and the accused's cross-examination was not conducted as required under CrPC Section 299 (trial in absence of absconded accused). Consequently, the charges were not substantiated, and the accused was acquitted and discharged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts