Government of Gujarat vs Narvatbhai Ramabhai Baria — 4101/2025

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDH030047802025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

4101/2025

Filing Date

28-11-2025

Registration No

4101/2025

Registration Date

28-11-2025

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

11821050251055

Police Station

SAGTALA POLICE STATION - DAHOD DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 66(1)B,

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

Narvatbhai Ramabhai Baria

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

The court dropped criminal proceedings against the accused for liquor consumption under Section 66(1)(b) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, holding that the investigating officer illegally initiated investigation without prior Magistrate's permission. The court reasoned that the 2017 Amendment deleted the provision classifying the offense as cognizable, making it non-cognizable under CrPC/BNSS (maximum punishment under six months), and therefore investigation required mandatory Magistrate's authorization, which was absent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court dropped criminal proceedings against the accused for liquor consumption under Section 66(1)(b) of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, holding that the investigating officer illegally initiated investigation without prior Magistrate's permission. The court reasoned that the 2017 Amendment deleted the provision classifying the offense as cognizable, making it non-cognizable under CrPC/BNSS (maximum punishment under six months), and therefore investigation required mandatory Magistrate's authorization, which was absent. 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