Government of Gujarat vs Rajeshbhai Madhabhai Devipujak Advocate - L D JADAV — 123/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 30th April 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK030001652026

e-Filing Number

13-01-2026

Filing Number

123/2026

Filing Date

30-Jan-2026

Registration No

123/2026

Registration Date

30-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, VADGAM

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

30-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11195009250695

Police Station

CHHAPI POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Rajeshbhai Madhabhai Devipujak Advocate - L D JADAV

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 30-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary The Vadodara Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused Rajshbhai Madhbhai Devipujak of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the independent panch witnesses did not corroborate the police investigation findings, and the case relied heavily on uncorroborated police testimony alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 07-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 03-Apr-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Evidence Of Prosecution

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 18-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 30-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 123/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The Vadodara Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused Rajshbhai Madhbhai Devipujak of charges under Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65 due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, as the independent panch witnesses did not corroborate the police investigation findings, and the case relied heavily on uncorroborated police testimony alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case