STATE GOVERNMENT vs SHREERAM BHERARAM BISNOI Advocate - A G KACHHOT — 447/2024

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AE,116B,98(2),81. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJAH120006052024

Filing Number

447/2024

Filing Date

28-Jun-2024

Registration No

447/2024

Registration Date

28-Jun-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, MANDAL

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 15-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11192005230105

Police Station

HASALPUR POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT

Year

2023

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AE,116B,98(2),81
Indian Penal Code Section 467,471

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.STATE GOVERNMENT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHREERAM BHERARAM BISNOI Advocate - A G KACHHOT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted the accused, Shriram Bheraram Bishnoi, of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(I), IPC Sections 116(B), 98(2), 81, and IPC Sections 467, 471, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical deficiencies: the panch witnesses could not corroborate the seizure of contraband liquor, there was no independent evidence supporting the alleged recovery, and the prosecution failed to establish the accused's possession of the seized materials. Therefore, the accused was acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 02-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 11-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 23-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 05-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 04-Feb-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 07-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 01-Jan-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 18-Dec-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  13. 11-Nov-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  14. 22-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  15. 17-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  16. 08-Sep-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  17. 29-Jul-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  18. 12-Jun-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  19. 09-Apr-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  20. 01-Feb-2025

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  21. 30-Nov-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  22. 21-Sep-2024

    Process To Accused

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  23. 12-Jul-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  24. 28-Jun-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 447/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused, Shriram Bheraram Bishnoi, of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(I), IPC Sections 116(B), 98(2), 81, and IPC Sections 467, 471, finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted critical deficiencies: the panch witnesses could not corroborate the seizure of contraband liquor, there was no independent evidence supporting the alleged recovery, and the prosecution failed to establish the accused's possession of the seized materials. Therefore, the accused was acquitted under CrPC Section 248(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case