State of Gujarat vs BHIKHUBEN VIKRAMBHAI DHOLKIYA Advocate - A B JOSHI — 323/2026
Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(A)(A). Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 27th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN070005702026
Filing Number
323/2026
Filing Date
18-Feb-2026
Registration No
323/2026
Registration Date
18-Feb-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, PALITANA
Judge
3-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
Decision Date
27-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
Last updated 31-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
11198042251247
Police Station
PALITANA TOWN POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.State of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.BHIKHUBEN VIKRAMBHAI DHOLKIYA Advocate - A B JOSHI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
27-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
The court acquitted the accused Bhikhuben Vikrambhai Dholkiya of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the alleged recovery of prohibited alcohol. The court determined that the panchnama (seizure document) lacked proper corroboration from independent witnesses, no FSL report confirmed the substance's nature, and critical procedural gaps undermined the case credibility, warranting acquittal based on reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
13-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
06-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
18-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 323/2026
The court acquitted the accused Bhikhuben Vikrambhai Dholkiya of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act 1949, Section 65(A), finding that the prosecution failed to conclusively prove the alleged recovery of prohibited alcohol. The court determined that the panchnama (seizure document) lacked proper corroboration from independent witnesses, no FSL report confirmed the substance's nature, and critical procedural gaps undermined the case credibility, warranting acquittal based on reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts