Government of Gujarat vs MADHUSING RUGSING RATHOD (DARBAR) Advocate - R C MAKWANA — 1165/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A),(E),116(2),98(2). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 23rd March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK060014182025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1165/2025

Filing Date

13-10-2025

Registration No

1165/2025

Registration Date

13-10-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEODAR

Judge

4-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11195017250807

Police Station

DEODAR POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

MADHUSING RUGSING RATHOD (DARBAR) Advocate - R C MAKWANA

Hearing History

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

23-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

09-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

23-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

02-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The court acquitted the accused (Madhusingh Rugsingh Rathod) in a case under the Prohibition Act Section 65A, 116(2), and 8(2). The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the case "beyond reasonable doubt" as five prosecution witnesses declared themselves hostile, crucial scientific evidence reports were missing, and the seizure of the foreign liquor bottle lacked proper corroboration regarding the producer's statement and seal verification, making the conviction legally impossible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused (Madhusingh Rugsingh Rathod) in a case under the Prohibition Act Section 65A, 116(2), and 8(2). The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the case "beyond reasonable doubt" as five prosecution witnesses declared themselves hostile, crucial scientific evidence reports were missing, and the seizure of the foreign liquor bottle lacked proper corroboration regarding the producer's statement and seal verification, making the conviction legally impossible. 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