THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs CHAMPAKBHAI MOTIBHAI MAKWANA — 430/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK130004812026

Filing Number

430/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

430/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT-DANTIWADA

Judge

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

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

Last updated 06-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

184

Police Station

DANTIWADA POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF GUJARAT

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.CHAMPAKBHAI MOTIBHAI MAKWANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Dantiwada JMFC court acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65-A) for possession of unlicensed alcohol found during a police patrol. The court found the prosecution's case failed due to insufficient witness testimony—the panchnama (official record) lacked proper corroboration, and the investigating officer could not establish the chain of custody or provide credible supporting evidence to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 10-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 430/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Dantiwada JMFC court acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65-A) for possession of unlicensed alcohol found during a police patrol. The court found the prosecution's case failed due to insufficient witness testimony—the panchnama (official record) lacked proper corroboration, and the investigating officer could not establish the chain of custody or provide credible supporting evidence to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case