Government of Gujarat vs POPATBHAI MAGANBHAI VAGHELA(DEVIPUJAK) Advocate - R T HADIYOL — 1723/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(a)(a). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 28th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBK030020152025
e-Filing Number
15-12-2025
Filing Number
1723/2025
Filing Date
20-Dec-2025
Registration No
1723/2025
Registration Date
20-Dec-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, VADGAM
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
28-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 06-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11195009250509
Police Station
CHHAPI POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.POPATBHAI MAGANBHAI VAGHELA(DEVIPUJAK) Advocate - R T HADIYOL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
28-Apr-2026
JudegementView PDF
Summary The Vadodara Judicial Magistrate acquitted defendant Poptbhai Maganbhai Waghela of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that independent panch witnesses did not corroborate the prosecution's evidence regarding alleged illicit liquor possession, and critical procedural deficiencies undermined the investigation's credibility, resulting in the defendant's acquittal with benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
28-Apr-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
03-Apr-2026
Judgement
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
05-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1723/2025
Summary The Vadodara Judicial Magistrate acquitted defendant Poptbhai Maganbhai Waghela of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, Section 65, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court determined that independent panch witnesses did not corroborate the prosecution's evidence regarding alleged illicit liquor possession, and critical procedural deficiencies undermined the investigation's credibility, resulting in the defendant's acquittal with benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts