THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs GEETABEN DINESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI VASAVA — 400/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 13th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBH030006452026
Filing Number
400/2026
Filing Date
20-Jan-2026
Registration No
400/2026
Registration Date
20-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, ANKLESVAR
Judge
7-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
13-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 27-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11199061250728
Police Station
ANKLESHWAR CITY B DIVISION POLICE STATION - BHARUCH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.GEETABEN DINESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI VASAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-May-2026
JudegementView PDF
The court acquitted the respondent, Geetaben Dineshbhai Chandubhai Vasava, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(a), finding insufficient and unreliable evidence. The prosecution failed to establish the panchnama (seizure record) properly, as the panch witnesses were police officers rather than independent citizens, and critical procedural safeguards were not followed, rendering the case against the accused baseless. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-May-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-May-2026
Judgement
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-May-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
04-May-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Apr-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Mar-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Feb-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
05-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 400/2026
The court acquitted the respondent, Geetaben Dineshbhai Chandubhai Vasava, of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(a), finding insufficient and unreliable evidence. The prosecution failed to establish the panchnama (seizure record) properly, as the panch witnesses were police officers rather than independent citizens, and critical procedural safeguards were not followed, rendering the case against the accused baseless. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts