Government of Gujarat vs Sureshbhai Saybabhai Nayak — 3275/2025

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B,. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 14th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDH030036922025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

3275/2025

Filing Date

18-08-2025

Registration No

3275/2025

Registration Date

18-08-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEVGADHBARIA

Judge

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

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF

FIR Details

FIR Number

11821050250643

Police Station

SAGTALA POLICE STATION - DAHOD DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 66(1)B,
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 Section 185,

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Sureshbhai Saybabhai Nayak

Hearing History

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

14-03-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

07-03-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

25-02-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

09-02-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

Summary: The court dropped criminal proceedings against the accused for violations under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, finding that the investigating officer illegally conducted the investigation without obtaining mandatory prior permission from the competent magistrate. The court held that the offences were non-cognizable under the 2017 Amendment (which deleted Section 118 classifying all offences as cognizable) and that the arrest power under the Motor Vehicles Act does not alter this non-cognizable character. The accused was discharged from bail bonds, and contraband liquor was ordered destroyed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court dropped criminal proceedings against the accused for violations under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 and Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, finding that the investigating officer illegally conducted the investigation without obtaining mandatory prior permission from the competent magistrate. The court held that the offences were non-cognizable under the 2017 Amendment (which deleted Section 118 classifying all offences as cognizable) and that the arrest power under the Motor Vehicles Act does not alter this non-cognizable character. The accused was discharged from bail bonds, and contraband liquor was ordered destroyed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, DEVGADHBARIA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case