THE STATE OF GUJARAT vs GOPALBHAI CHAGANBHAI JATAPARA Advocate - B H CHHATRAVALA — 2169/2023
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65(E),116(B),81. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 16th April 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJBT030027092023
Filing Number
2169/2023
Filing Date
09-08-2023
Registration No
2169/2023
Registration Date
09-08-2023
Court
TALUKA COURT, GADHADA
Judge
2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
16th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL
FIR Details
FIR Number
11190004230902
Police Station
GADHADA POLICE STATION – BOTAD DISTRICT
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
GOPALBHAI CHAGANBHAI JATAPARA Advocate - B H CHHATRAVALA
KULDIPBHAI HATHIBHAI GOVALIYA
Adv. B H CHHATRAVALA
Hearing History
Judge: 2-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 04-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 04-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 20-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 20-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Criminal Case No. 2169/23 The Gujarat court acquitted all three accused (Gopalbhai Chaganbhai Jatapara, Kuldipbhai Hathibhai Govaliya, and Udhyabhai Babhabhai Khavad) of charges under IPC Sections 65(f), 116(b), and 81 related to illegal possession and sale of foreign liquor. The court found that the prosecution's evidence, relying primarily on panchnamas (police attestation documents) and police testimonies without independent corroborating witnesses, was insufficient to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as the seized liquor evidence lacked proper authentication and chain of custody documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Criminal Case No. 2169/23 The Gujarat court acquitted all three accused (Gopalbhai Chaganbhai Jatapara, Kuldipbhai Hathibhai Govaliya, and Udhyabhai Babhabhai Khavad) of charges under IPC Sections 65(f), 116(b), and 81 related to illegal possession and sale of foreign liquor. The court found that the prosecution's evidence, relying primarily on panchnamas (police attestation documents) and police testimonies without independent corroborating witnesses, was insufficient to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, as the seized liquor evidence lacked proper authentication and chain of custody documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts