THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs NARENDRA GOPINATH PANDE — 4968/2025

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 06th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBH030102602025

Filing Number

4968/2025

Filing Date

09-Dec-2025

Registration No

4968/2025

Registration Date

09-Dec-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, ANKLESVAR

Judge

7-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

06-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 09-Jul-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11199061250733

Police Station

ANKLESHWAR CITY B DIVISION POLICE STATION - BHARUCH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.NARENDRA GOPINATH PANDE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    The court acquitted Narendra Gopinath Pande of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A), finding insufficient evidence to prove the offense. The judgment identified critical procedural defects: the panchnama (witness record) lacked proper authentication, investigating officers' testimonies were unreliable, and the chemical analysis report was not produced in court. Consequently, the state failed to establish a prima facie case, warranting acquittal under CrPC Section 271(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 30-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 25-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 21-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 09-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 30-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 09-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 4968/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court acquitted Narendra Gopinath Pande of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65(A), finding insufficient evidence to prove the offense. The judgment identified critical procedural defects: the panchnama (witness record) lacked proper authentication, investigating officers' testimonies were unreliable, and the chemical analysis report was not produced in court. Consequently, the state failed to establish a prima facie case, warranting acquittal under CrPC Section 271(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case