THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs AMRUTBHAI AKA JEKKI DALSUKHBHAI VASAVA — 405/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 27th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBH030006502026
Filing Number
405/2026
Filing Date
20-Jan-2026
Registration No
405/2026
Registration Date
20-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, ANKLESVAR
Judge
7-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
27-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 27-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11199061250972
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.AMRUTBHAI AKA JEKKI DALSUKHBHAI VASAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
27-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case 405/2026 Summary The court acquitted Amrutbhai (Jekki) Dalsukhbhai Vasava of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65 (possession of foreign liquor for sale) because the State failed to prove its case with sufficient evidence. The court found critical deficiencies: the panchnama (seizure record) lacked proper witness verification, the laboratory report confirming the seized substance was unsubstantiated, and the investigating officer could not establish the genuine nature of the evidence chain, warranting acquittal under CrPC Section 271(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Apr-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Apr-2026
Judgement
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-Apr-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
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. 405/2026
Case 405/2026 Summary The court acquitted Amrutbhai (Jekki) Dalsukhbhai Vasava of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65 (possession of foreign liquor for sale) because the State failed to prove its case with sufficient evidence. The court found critical deficiencies: the panchnama (seizure record) lacked proper witness verification, the laboratory report confirming the seized substance was unsubstantiated, and the investigating officer could not establish the genuine nature of the evidence chain, warranting acquittal under CrPC Section 271(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts