STATE OF GUJARAT vs VIJAYSINH PUNBHA SOLANKI Advocate - S A PARMAR — 196/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65F. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 27th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAH150002402025
Filing Number
196/2025
Filing Date
18-03-2025
Registration No
196/2025
Registration Date
18-03-2025
Court
Taluka Court, Detroj
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11192017250067
Police Station
DETROJ POLICE STATION - AHMEDABAD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
VIJAYSINH PUNBHA SOLANKI Advocate - S A PARMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 23-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 16-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 11-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 17-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Judgment Summary The Principal Civil Judge at Detrojin acquitted VijaySingh Punbha Solanki of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65-F, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that while illicit liquor was seized, the prosecution's evidence—particularly the panchnama (search document) and recovery details—lacked independent corroboration from neutral witnesses, and the chain of custody and handling of the seized material remained questionable and unreliable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Judgment Summary The Principal Civil Judge at Detrojin acquitted VijaySingh Punbha Solanki of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65-F, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that while illicit liquor was seized, the prosecution's evidence—particularly the panchnama (search document) and recovery details—lacked independent corroboration from neutral witnesses, and the chain of custody and handling of the seized material remained questionable and unreliable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts