THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs PRAVINBHAI URFE DHUDABHAI LAKHMANBHAI VAGHELA Advocate - H R JOSHI, B P PARMAR — 14/2026
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65F. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 13th May 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN090000202026
e-Filing Number
03-01-2026
Filing Number
14/2026
Filing Date
09-01-2026
Registration No
14/2026
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
11198059250464
Police Station
UMRALA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
PRAVINBHAI URFE DHUDABHAI LAKHMANBHAI 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
Case Summary: C.C.No. 14/2026 Court Decision: The accused Pravinbhai Urfe Dhudabhai Lakhmanbhai Vaghela was acquitted and found not guilty under the Prohibition Act Section 65(F). The court held that the prosecution failed to establish exclusive and conscious possession of the alleged illicit liquor, as the panchas (witnesses) did not corroborate the seizure details in their testimonies, creating reasonable doubt favoring the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: C.C.No. 14/2026 Court Decision: The accused Pravinbhai Urfe Dhudabhai Lakhmanbhai Vaghela was acquitted and found not guilty under the Prohibition Act Section 65(F). The court held that the prosecution failed to establish exclusive and conscious possession of the alleged illicit liquor, as the panchas (witnesses) did not corroborate the seizure details in their testimonies, creating reasonable doubt favoring the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts