Government of Gujarat vs DINESHBHAI DUNGARBHAI BHEDRU (CHAUDAHRY) Advocate - P C NAI — 1187/2025
Case under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 185,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 10th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBK060014462025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1187/2025
Filing Date
27-10-2025
Registration No
1187/2025
Registration Date
27-10-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, DEODAR
Judge
4-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11195017250705
Police Station
DEODAR POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
DINESHBHAI DUNGARBHAI BHEDRU (CHAUDAHRY) Advocate - P C NAI
Hearing History
Judge: 4-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FURTHER STATEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 05-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 20-02-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 05-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The court acquitted the accused (Dineshbhai Dungarabhai Bheduchidhri) of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(e), 116(2), 66(1)(b), and MV Act Section 185, finding insufficient evidence that the accused was driving under the influence of alcohol. The court determined that while the accused was found with contraband alcohol, the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that he had consumed alcohol or was impaired while driving, as critical medical tests and proper procedures were not followed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The court acquitted the accused (Dineshbhai Dungarabhai Bheduchidhri) of charges under the Prohibition Act Section 65(e), 116(2), 66(1)(b), and MV Act Section 185, finding insufficient evidence that the accused was driving under the influence of alcohol. The court determined that while the accused was found with contraband alcohol, the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that he had consumed alcohol or was impaired while driving, as critical medical tests and proper procedures were not followed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts