Government of Gujarat vs VINODKUMAR S/O PRAKASHCHAND BHAGARAM SAHU (NAI) Advocate - B K PARMAR — 936/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A),(E),116(2),98(2) 81. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 01st April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK060011092025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

936/2025

Filing Date

08-08-2025

Registration No

936/2025

Registration Date

08-08-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEODAR

Judge

4-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

01st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11195017250290

Police Station

DEODAR POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65(A),(E),116(2),98(2) 81

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

VINODKUMAR S/O PRAKASHCHAND BHAGARAM SAHU (NAI) Advocate - B K PARMAR

Hearing History

Judge: 4-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

01-04-2026

Disposed

25-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

24-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

10-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

23-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

01-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The court acquitted the accused in this Prohibition Act case, finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The critical witnesses turned hostile, the panchnama (seizure record) lacked proper corroboration, and the investigating officer failed to examine the accused regarding the seized foreign liquor bottles. Without conclusive evidence, the court ruled the accused not guilty under IPC Section 271(1) and ordered acquittal with seizure of contraband liquor and fine provisions per IPC Section 481(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused in this Prohibition Act case, finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The critical witnesses turned hostile, the panchnama (seizure record) lacked proper corroboration, and the investigating officer failed to examine the accused regarding the seized foreign liquor bottles. Without conclusive evidence, the court ruled the accused not guilty under IPC Section 271(1) and ordered acquittal with seizure of contraband liquor and fine provisions per IPC Section 481(1). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, DEODAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case