THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs KAILASHBEN PRAVINBHAI BHAGABHAI VASAVA — 4885/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 02nd April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBH030100832025
Filing Number
4885/2025
Filing Date
06-Dec-2025
Registration No
4885/2025
Registration Date
06-Dec-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
11199061250711
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.KAILASHBEN PRAVINBHAI BHAGABHAI VASAVA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
02-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Kailashben Pravinbhai Bhagabhai Vasava (4885/2025) The court acquitted the respondent under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(a), finding insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the panchnama (official record) and the five witnesses' credibility, as they were all police officers with no independent corroboration of the seized substance sample. The court ruled that mere reliance on police witnesses without proper testing laboratory reports and certified evidence was inadequate to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. 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
-
31-Jan-2026
Process To Accused
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
08-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 4885/2025
Case Summary: State of Gujarat v. Kailashben Pravinbhai Bhagabhai Vasava (4885/2025) The court acquitted the respondent under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(a), finding insufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the panchnama (official record) and the five witnesses' credibility, as they were all police officers with no independent corroboration of the seized substance sample. The court ruled that mere reliance on police witnesses without proper testing laboratory reports and certified evidence was inadequate to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts