THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs SUMANBEN RATILALBHAI BHANABHAI VASAVA — 2863/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBH030062502025
Filing Number
2863/2025
Filing Date
25-Jul-2025
Registration No
2863/2025
Registration Date
25-Jul-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, ANKLESVAR
Judge
7-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
02-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11199060250248
Police Station
PANOLI POLICE STATION - BHARUCH DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.SUMANBEN RATILALBHAI BHANABHAI VASAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
02-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: 2863/2025 - State of Gujarat v. Sumanben Ratilalbhai Bhanabhai Vasava The court acquitted the respondent of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(AA), finding insufficient evidence to establish the alleged offense of illegal liquor sale. The prosecution failed to prove its case through credible witness testimony, as the panchas (witnesses) could not substantiate details of the alleged contraband, and lab testing reports for the seized liquid were not produced in court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Apr-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Mar-2026
Judgement
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Feb-2026
Judgement
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
19-Jan-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Dec-2025
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Nov-2025
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Oct-2025
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
03-Sep-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
25-Jul-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2863/2025
Case Summary: 2863/2025 - State of Gujarat v. Sumanben Ratilalbhai Bhanabhai Vasava The court acquitted the respondent of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(AA), finding insufficient evidence to establish the alleged offense of illegal liquor sale. The prosecution failed to prove its case through credible witness testimony, as the panchas (witnesses) could not substantiate details of the alleged contraband, and lab testing reports for the seized liquid were not produced in court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts