Government of Gujarat vs POONAMBEN URFE BHAGVATIBEN ANANDBHAI DEVIPUJAK Advocate - V M SOLANKI — 2976/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 13th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAH100039462025
e-Filing Number
27-05-2025
Filing Number
2976/2025
Filing Date
10-11-2025
Registration No
2976/2025
Registration Date
10-11-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, VIRAMGAM
Judge
2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
13th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11192060250149
Police Station
VIRAMGAM- RURAL POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
POONAMBEN URFE BHAGVATIBEN ANANDBHAI DEVIPUJAK Advocate - V M SOLANKI
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FURTHER STATEMENT
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 07-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 04-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 17-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 11-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary Criminal Case No. 2976/25 | Additional Judicial Magistrate, Viramgam | Judgment Date: 13 April 2026 The court acquitted the accused, Punambhen (also known as Bhagwatiben), of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65-A after finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Although illicit liquor was allegedly seized from the accused's premises, the court noted critical procedural lapses: the panchas (witnesses) did not corroborate that the contraband was found in the accused's possession, the seizure lacked independent corroboration, and the accused herself was not apprehended at the scene. Applying the principle that suspicion cannot substitute for proof, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt and ordered her acquittal with destruction of seized materials after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Criminal Case No. 2976/25 | Additional Judicial Magistrate, Viramgam | Judgment Date: 13 April 2026 The court acquitted the accused, Punambhen (also known as Bhagwatiben), of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65-A after finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Although illicit liquor was allegedly seized from the accused's premises, the court noted critical procedural lapses: the panchas (witnesses) did not corroborate that the contraband was found in the accused's possession, the seizure lacked independent corroboration, and the accused herself was not apprehended at the scene. Applying the principle that suspicion cannot substitute for proof, the court granted the accused the benefit of doubt and ordered her acquittal with destruction of seized materials after appeal period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts