GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT vs DALPATBHAI SAJJANSINH CHAUHAN Advocate - R.N.PATEL — 1272/2021

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA,116B,81,98(2). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 03rd April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJAR040013632021

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1272/2021

Filing Date

25-08-2021

Registration No

1272/2021

Registration Date

25-08-2021

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

11188007210317

Police Station

MEGHRAJ POLICE STATION – ARVALLI @ MODASA DISTRICT

Year

2021

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA,116B,81,98(2)

Petitioner(s)

GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

DALPATBHAI SAJJANSINH CHAUHAN Advocate - R.N.PATEL

PRUTHVIPALSINH INDRASINH CHAUHAN

Hearing History

Judge: 2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

03-04-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

25-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

09-02-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

12-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

03-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The court acquitted both accused (Dalpat Singh and Prithvipal Singh) of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and IPC sections 65(A)(A), 116(B), 98(2), and 81, finding insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove that the seized foreign whisky bottles came from the accused's possession, as critical procedural requirements—including proper panchayat (witness) signatures on seizure documents and authentication of seized goods—were not adequately established on the court record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted both accused (Dalpat Singh and Prithvipal Singh) of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act and IPC sections 65(A)(A), 116(B), 98(2), and 81, finding insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove that the seized foreign whisky bottles came from the accused's possession, as critical procedural requirements—including proper panchayat (witness) signatures on seizure documents and authentication of seized goods—were not adequately established on the court record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, MEGHRAJ All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case