THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs MAHESHBHAI KALABHAI PARMAR Advocate - P K DESAI — 29/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 24th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAR060000352026
Filing Number
29/2026
Filing Date
06-01-2026
Registration No
29/2026
Registration Date
06-01-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, DHANSURA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
50767
Police Station
DHANSURA POLICE STATION – ARVALLI @ MODASA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
MAHESHBHAI KALABHAI PARMAR Advocate - P K DESAI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 13-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 19-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 07-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: CC No. 29/2026 The State of Gujarat v. Maheshbhai Kalabhai Parmar The court acquitted the accused of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act after finding that the panchas (mandatory witnesses) who were present during the liquor seizure failed to corroborate the prosecution's case, and critical procedural requirements under the 2012 Liquor Sample Rules were not followed. The court held that without independent corroboration from the panchas and proper forensic analysis documentation, conviction cannot rest solely on police testimony, thereby setting aside the charges against the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CC No. 29/2026 The State of Gujarat v. Maheshbhai Kalabhai Parmar The court acquitted the accused of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act after finding that the panchas (mandatory witnesses) who were present during the liquor seizure failed to corroborate the prosecution's case, and critical procedural requirements under the 2012 Liquor Sample Rules were not followed. The court held that without independent corroboration from the panchas and proper forensic analysis documentation, conviction cannot rest solely on police testimony, thereby setting aside the charges against the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts