THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs TEJALBEN SAGARBHAI RAJESHBHAI CHUNARA — 169/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAH090002732026
Filing Number
169/2026
Filing Date
27-01-2026
Registration No
169/2026
Registration Date
27-01-2026
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
11192015251447
Police Station
CHANGDODAR POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
TEJALBEN SAGARBHAI RAJESHBHAI 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: C.C. No. 169/2026 | Date: 30/03/2025 | Court: Sanad, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) The court acquitted the accused Tejalbhen Saurabhh Chunara of charges under IPC Section 54(a)(a) (a bailable offense) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, relying only on unsubstantiated witness testimonies without independent corroboration. Notably, the accused remained absent throughout proceedings under CrPC Section 299 (trial in absentia), and no credible documentary or forensic evidence was produced to prove the alleged crime. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: C.C. No. 169/2026 | Date: 30/03/2025 | Court: Sanad, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) The court acquitted the accused Tejalbhen Saurabhh Chunara of charges under IPC Section 54(a)(a) (a bailable offense) due to insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, relying only on unsubstantiated witness testimonies without independent corroboration. Notably, the accused remained absent throughout proceedings under CrPC Section 299 (trial in absentia), and no credible documentary or forensic evidence was produced to prove the alleged crime. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts