GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs PRAKASHCHANDRA BHAVANJI LAKHAJI REBARI Advocate - D K RATHOD — 690/2023
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AE,81. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAR040007122023
Filing Number
690/2023
Filing Date
07-Feb-2023
Registration No
690/2023
Registration Date
07-Feb-2023
Court
TALUKA COURT, MEGHRAJ
Judge
2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
Decision Date
03-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 06-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11188007220187
Police Station
MEGHRAJ POLICE STATION – ARVALLI @ MODASA DISTRICT
Year
2022
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.PRAKASHCHANDRA BHAVANJI LAKHAJI REBARI Advocate - D K RATHOD
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
03-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary Court Decision: The Additional District and Sessions Judge of Meghraj acquitted the accused, Prakashchandra s/o Bhavnaji Lakaji Rebari, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A.I.), 81 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as critical evidence (sealed bottles with company verification and proper documentation) was not produced on record. Key Reasoning: While 163 bottles of foreign liquor and a vehicle were seized, the court noted the prosecution could not establish the brand authenticity or provide official company confirmation of the liquor seized. The panchayat witnesses' testimony was unreliable due to contradictions, and the panchnama lacked proper sealing procedures required under the Prohibition Act. The court emphasized that conviction cannot rest solely on police testimony without corroborating material evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
03-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
10-Mar-2026
Further Statement
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
09-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
29-Jan-2026
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
01-Jan-2026
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
14-Nov-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
29-Aug-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
05-Jun-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
09-May-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
05-Apr-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
17-Mar-2025
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
27-Dec-2024
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
16-Dec-2024
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
13-Dec-2024
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
04-Oct-2024
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
31-Aug-2024
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
05-Aug-2024
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
26-Jun-2024
Process To Accused
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
25-Apr-2024
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Mar-2024
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Dec-2023
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
18-Oct-2023
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
19-Aug-2023
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Jun-2023
Process To Accused
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Apr-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Feb-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 690/2023
Case Summary Court Decision: The Additional District and Sessions Judge of Meghraj acquitted the accused, Prakashchandra s/o Bhavnaji Lakaji Rebari, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A.I.), 81 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as critical evidence (sealed bottles with company verification and proper documentation) was not produced on record. Key Reasoning: While 163 bottles of foreign liquor and a vehicle were seized, the court noted the prosecution could not establish the brand authenticity or provide official company confirmation of the liquor seized. The panchayat witnesses' testimony was unreliable due to contradictions, and the panchnama lacked proper sealing procedures required under the Prohibition Act. The court emphasized that conviction cannot rest solely on police testimony without corroborating material evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts