THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs HARESHBHAI MAGHAJI NAT — 433/2026

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

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK130004842026

Filing Number

433/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

433/2026

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

64

Police Station

PANTHAWADA 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.HARESHBHAI MAGHAJI NAT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The court acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A) after finding the prosecution's case against him for possession of 500ml of illicit liquor without a permit failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the testimonies of the police witnesses were not credible and lacked proper corroboration, as the panch (independent witness) present during the search denied the alleged recovery and the challan proceedings were procedurally defective. 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. 433/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted the accused under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A) after finding the prosecution's case against him for possession of 500ml of illicit liquor without a permit failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the testimonies of the police witnesses were not credible and lacked proper corroboration, as the panch (independent witness) present during the search denied the alleged recovery and the challan proceedings were procedurally defective. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case