THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs RAJUBEN PRAVINBHAI MAGANBHAI VASAVA — 2905/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBH030063232025
Filing Number
2905/2025
Filing Date
29-Jul-2025
Registration No
2905/2025
Registration Date
29-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
11199061250452
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.RAJUBEN PRAVINBHAI MAGANBHAI VASAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
02-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: THE STATE OF GUJARAT v. RAJUBEN PRAVINBHAI MAGANBHAI VASAVA (2905/2025) The court acquitted the respondent of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(AA), finding the prosecution's evidence insufficient and the panchnama (inspection report) unreliable due to procedural defects. The court held that the five panchas (witnesses) were police officers rather than independent citizens, undermining the credibility of the seized contraband evidence and the testing laboratory report. 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
-
07-Oct-2025
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
02-Sep-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
29-Jul-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2905/2025
Case Summary: THE STATE OF GUJARAT v. RAJUBEN PRAVINBHAI MAGANBHAI VASAVA (2905/2025) The court acquitted the respondent of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(AA), finding the prosecution's evidence insufficient and the panchnama (inspection report) unreliable due to procedural defects. The court held that the five panchas (witnesses) were police officers rather than independent citizens, undermining the credibility of the seized contraband evidence and the testing laboratory report. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts