GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs JITENDRAKUMAR MEGHJIBHAI PATIDAR Advocate - K K PARMAR — 726/2023
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA,116B,98(2). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAR040007482023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
726/2023
Filing Date
07-02-2023
Registration No
726/2023
Registration Date
07-02-2023
Court
TALUKA COURT, MEGHRAJ
Judge
2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
03rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11188007210387
Police Station
MEGHRAJ POLICE STATION – ARVALLI @ MODASA DISTRICT
Year
2021
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
JITENDRAKUMAR MEGHJIBHAI PATIDAR Advocate - K K PARMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 03-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 09-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 29-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED | |
| 01-01-2026 | PROCESS TO ACCUSED |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused Jitendrakumar Meghjiblai Patidar of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act sections 65(A), 116(B), and 98(2) due to insufficient evidence. The complainant failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as crucial evidence—including sealed bottles with proper company labels and authentication—was not adequately presented in the trial record. The court found the prosecution's case lacked substantive corroboration and ordered the accused's release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The court acquitted the accused Jitendrakumar Meghjiblai Patidar of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act sections 65(A), 116(B), and 98(2) due to insufficient evidence. The complainant failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as crucial evidence—including sealed bottles with proper company labels and authentication—was not adequately presented in the trial record. The court found the prosecution's case lacked substantive corroboration and ordered the accused's release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts