THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs CHATURBHAI RAMABHAI PARMAR Advocate - N K BHARVAD — 32/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 21st April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJAR060000382026
Filing Number
32/2026
Filing Date
06-01-2026
Registration No
32/2026
Registration Date
06-01-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, DHANSURA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
21st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
50742
Police Station
DHANSURA POLICE STATION – ARVALLI @ MODASA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
CHATURBHAI RAMABHAI PARMAR Advocate - N K BHARVAD
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 03-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 21-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 07-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Chaturbhai Ramabhai Parmar Court Decision: The court acquitted the accused of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding the prosecution case unsubstantiated. The court held that the independent witnesses (panchas) who were allegedly present during the liquor seizure failed to corroborate the police officer's testimony, and without such independent corroboration, conviction cannot rest solely on uncorroborated police evidence. The court also noted procedural violations in evidence collection and analysis, rendering the case insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Chaturbhai Ramabhai Parmar Court Decision: The court acquitted the accused of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, finding the prosecution case unsubstantiated. The court held that the independent witnesses (panchas) who were allegedly present during the liquor seizure failed to corroborate the police officer's testimony, and without such independent corroboration, conviction cannot rest solely on uncorroborated police evidence. The court also noted procedural violations in evidence collection and analysis, rendering the case insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts