State of Gujarat vs MANGUBEN VASHARAMBHAI UKABHAI PARMAR Advocate - A B JOSHI — 244/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 17th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBN070004812026

Case disposed

Filing Number

244/2026

Filing Date

11-02-2026

Registration No

244/2026

Registration Date

11-02-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, PALITANA

Judge

3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

17th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11198042251137

Police Station

PALITANA TOWN POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65(A)(A)

Petitioner(s)

State of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

MANGUBEN VASHARAMBHAI UKABHAI PARMAR Advocate - A B JOSHI

Hearing History

Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

17-04-2026

Disposed

27-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

13-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

27-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

17-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary of Case 244/2026 The court acquitted accused Manguben Vasharambhai Ukabhai Parmar of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the panchnama (seizure document) was not properly corroborated by independent witnesses, the seized material lacked FSL confirmation, and critical evidentiary gaps created reasonable doubt favoring the accused. Consequently, the accused was discharged and acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 244/2026 The court acquitted accused Manguben Vasharambhai Ukabhai Parmar of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the panchnama (seizure document) was not properly corroborated by independent witnesses, the seized material lacked FSL confirmation, and critical evidentiary gaps created reasonable doubt favoring the accused. Consequently, the accused was discharged and acquitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, PALITANA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case