Government of Gujarat vs Hareshbhai alias Harish Rameshbhai Nayak — 3997/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B,. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDH030046712025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
3997/2025
Filing Date
27-11-2025
Registration No
3997/2025
Registration Date
27-11-2025
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
11821005250856
Police Station
DEVGADH BARIA POLICE STATION - DAHOD DISTRICT
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Hareshbhai alias Harish Rameshbhai Nayak
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 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
Summary The court dropped the criminal proceedings and discharged the accused because the investigating officer illegally initiated investigation into non-cognizable offences under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 66(1)(b)) without obtaining mandatory prior permission from the Magistrate as required under Section 174(2) of BNSS. The court held that the 2017 Amendment deleted the provision making all offences cognizable, thereby classifying this offence as non-cognizable due to its maximum punishment of six months, and that procedural safeguards cannot be circumvented even under special statutes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court dropped the criminal proceedings and discharged the accused because the investigating officer illegally initiated investigation into non-cognizable offences under the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949 (Section 66(1)(b)) without obtaining mandatory prior permission from the Magistrate as required under Section 174(2) of BNSS. The court held that the 2017 Amendment deleted the provision making all offences cognizable, thereby classifying this offence as non-cognizable due to its maximum punishment of six months, and that procedural safeguards cannot be circumvented even under special statutes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts