State of Gujarat vs RAIYABEN SURESHBHAI VAGHELA Advocate - A B JOSHI — 319/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 27th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBN070005652026

Case disposed

Filing Number

319/2026

Filing Date

18-02-2026

Registration No

319/2026

Registration Date

18-02-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, PALITANA

Judge

3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

27th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11198042260040

Police Station

PALITANA TOWN POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

State of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

RAIYABEN SURESHBHAI VAGHELA Advocate - A B JOSHI

Hearing History

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

27-03-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

06-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

27-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary of Case 319/2026 The court acquitted respondent Raiyaben Sureshbhai Vaghela of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the panchnama (official inventory record) was not adequately proven, independent witnesses were not examined, the panch witnesses who testified contradicted the complainant's case, no FSL report confirmed the seized substance was alcohol, and the police investigation was insufficient. Applying established precedents, the court granted the benefit of doubt to the accused and acquitted her with directions to destroy the seized contraband. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 319/2026 The court acquitted respondent Raiyaben Sureshbhai Vaghela of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the panchnama (official inventory record) was not adequately proven, independent witnesses were not examined, the panch witnesses who testified contradicted the complainant's case, no FSL report confirmed the seized substance was alcohol, and the police investigation was insufficient. Applying established precedents, the court granted the benefit of doubt to the accused and acquitted her with directions to destroy the seized contraband. 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