THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs ANILBHAI CHANABHAI VAGHELA Advocate - H R JOSHI, B P PARMAR — 13/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65F. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 13th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN090000192026
e-Filing Number
03-01-2026
Filing Number
13/2026
Filing Date
09-01-2026
Registration No
13/2026
Registration Date
09-01-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, UMRALA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
13th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11198059250465
Police Station
UMRALA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
ANILBHAI CHANABHAI VAGHELA Advocate - H R JOSHI, B P PARMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-05-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 01-05-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT |
| 24-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 18-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court acquitted accused Anilbhai Chanabhai Vaghela of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(F) for allegedly manufacturing liquor, finding insufficient evidence of exclusive and conscious possession of the prohibited material. The court held that panch witnesses failed to corroborate the seizure details, no FSL report confirmed the substance's nature, and the prosecution could not establish the accused's direct involvement beyond reasonable doubt, warranting acquittal with benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court acquitted accused Anilbhai Chanabhai Vaghela of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(F) for allegedly manufacturing liquor, finding insufficient evidence of exclusive and conscious possession of the prohibited material. The court held that panch witnesses failed to corroborate the seizure details, no FSL report confirmed the substance's nature, and the prosecution could not establish the accused's direct involvement beyond reasonable doubt, warranting acquittal with benefit of doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts