THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs BHARATBHAI SAVJIBHAI BARAIYA Advocate - A U TELI — 193/2025
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A),116(B),81. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 18th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN050003342025
Filing Number
193/2025
Filing Date
15-02-2025
Registration No
193/2025
Registration Date
15-02-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, MAHUVA
Judge
5-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
18th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11198035240807
Police Station
MAHUVA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
BHARATBHAI SAVJIBHAI BARAIYA Advocate - A U TELI
Hearing History
Judge: 5-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 01-05-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 23-04-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 29-01-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Case 193/2025 The court acquitted the two accused (Bharatbhai Savjibhai Baraiya and Dikshantrhai Dipakbhai Baraiya) of charges under the Prohibition Act for alleged illegal possession of English liquor bottles found at their residence. The court found the prosecution's case fundamentally flawed: the panchas (independent witnesses) failed to support the case, critical evidence regarding seizure and analysis was not properly recorded, and no documentary proof established ownership or possession of the contraband. The court emphasized that without credible corroborating evidence and reliable witness testimony, no conviction could be sustained, rendering the investigation procedure tainted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 193/2025 The court acquitted the two accused (Bharatbhai Savjibhai Baraiya and Dikshantrhai Dipakbhai Baraiya) of charges under the Prohibition Act for alleged illegal possession of English liquor bottles found at their residence. The court found the prosecution's case fundamentally flawed: the panchas (independent witnesses) failed to support the case, critical evidence regarding seizure and analysis was not properly recorded, and no documentary proof established ownership or possession of the contraband. The court emphasized that without credible corroborating evidence and reliable witness testimony, no conviction could be sustained, rendering the investigation procedure tainted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts