THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs PRAKASHBHAI SONAJI BHAT — 434/2026

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK130004852026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

434/2026

Filing Date

10-03-2026

Registration No

434/2026

Registration Date

10-03-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT-DANTIWADA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

79

Police Station

PANTHAWADA POLICE STATION - BANASKANTHA DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

PRAKASHBHAI SONAJI BHAT

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

23-03-2026

Disposed

10-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary Court Decision: The Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Dantiwada acquitted the accused Prakashbhai Sonaji Bhat of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65-A). The court found that while the prosecution alleged possession of 01 liter of country liquor worth Rs. 200 without proper permit, the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt due to insufficient and unreliable witness testimony. Key Reasoning: The court noted that the panchanama (official record) lacked proper corroboration from credible witnesses, and the police witnesses' statements were contradicted and inadequately supported. The court emphasized that without reliable and consistent evidence meeting legal standards, the accused could not be convicted despite the seizure of liquor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Court Decision: The Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Dantiwada acquitted the accused Prakashbhai Sonaji Bhat of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 65-A). The court found that while the prosecution alleged possession of 01 liter of country liquor worth Rs. 200 without proper permit, the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt due to insufficient and unreliable witness testimony. Key Reasoning: The court noted that the panchanama (official record) lacked proper corroboration from credible witnesses, and the police witnesses' statements were contradicted and inadequately supported. The court emphasized that without reliable and consistent evidence meeting legal standards, the accused could not be convicted despite the seizure of liquor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT-DANTIWADA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case