THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs KIRANBEN KISHANBHAI MATHASULIYA Advocate - B P PARMAR — 81/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th April 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBN090001002026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

21-02-2026

Filing Number

81/2026

Filing Date

21-02-2026

Registration No

81/2026

Registration Date

21-02-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, UMRALA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

16th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11198059260027

Police Station

UMRALA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA

Petitioner(s)

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

KIRANBEN KISHANBHAI MATHASULIYA Advocate - B P PARMAR

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

16-04-2026

Disposed

10-04-2026

JUDGEMENT

04-04-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

27-03-2026

FURTHER STATEMENT

20-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

16-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: C.C.NO. 81/2026 Court Decision: The Principal Judicial Magistrate First Class, Umrala, acquitted Kiranben Kishanbhai Mathasuliya of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for allegedly possessing and selling liquor without permission. The court found insufficient evidence that the accused had exclusive and conscious possession of the confiscated liquor, as the panchnama (seizure record) lacked proper corroboration from independent witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: C.C.NO. 81/2026 Court Decision: The Principal Judicial Magistrate First Class, Umrala, acquitted Kiranben Kishanbhai Mathasuliya of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for allegedly possessing and selling liquor without permission. The court found insufficient evidence that the accused had exclusive and conscious possession of the confiscated liquor, as the panchnama (seizure record) lacked proper corroboration from independent witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, UMRALA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case