THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs KARSHANBHAI OGHADBHAI BHEDA Advocate - R G GOHIL — 169/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65E,116B,98(2),81. Status: EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBN090001992025
Next Hearing
06th June 2026
e-Filing Number
23-04-2025
Filing Number
169/2025
Filing Date
23-04-2025
Registration No
169/2025
Registration Date
23-04-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, UMRALA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
FIR Details
FIR Number
11198059250011
Police Station
UMRALA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
KARSHANBHAI OGHADBHAI BHEDA Advocate - R G GOHIL
RAHULBHAI BHUPATBHAI DER
Adv. R G GOHIL
JANAKGIRI MANGIRI GAUSWAMI
Adv. Y M GOSWAMI
SUBHASHBHAI KALABHAI DANGAR
Adv. R G GOHIL
MADHUBHAI HATHIBHAI GOVALIYA
Adv. R G GOHIL
VITHTHALBHAI SAVSHIBHAI CHAVDA
Adv. Y M GOSWAMI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-05-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 18-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 04-04-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 27-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
| 20-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Interim Orders
Summary of Case CC/169/2025 Outcome: The court discharged Respondent No. 3 (the accused) from the case under Section 227 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The petition filed by the State of Gujarat was dismissed. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case with grave suspicion against the accused. While the evidence created some suspicion, it did not meet the threshold required for framing charges. The court applied the settled legal principle that mere suspicion is insufficient; a prima facie case requires grave suspicion that has not been properly explained by the accused's defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case CC/169/2025 Outcome: The court discharged Respondent No. 3 (the accused) from the case under Section 227 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The petition filed by the State of Gujarat was dismissed. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case with grave suspicion against the accused. While the evidence created some suspicion, it did not meet the threshold required for framing charges. The court applied the settled legal principle that mere suspicion is insufficient; a prima facie case requires grave suspicion that has not been properly explained by the accused's defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts