Government of Gujarat vs VIJAYBHAI AMRABHAI MAVI — 240/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 85,66(1)(B),. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 14th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDH040002652026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

240/2026

Filing Date

20-01-2026

Registration No

240/2026

Registration Date

20-01-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, LIMKHEDA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF

FIR Details

FIR Number

11821035250320

Police Station

LIMKHEDA POLICE STATION - DAHOD DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 85,66(1)(B),

Petitioner(s)

Government of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

VIJAYBHAI AMRABHAI MAVI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &

14-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

WARRANT OF ARREST

16-02-2026

WARRANT OF ARREST

20-01-2026

SUMMONS - NOTICE

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

Case Summary The court discharged the accused under the Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) due to lack of sufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to provide a mandatory medical blood test report as required by The Bombay Prohibition (Medical Examination and Blood Test) Rules, 1959, which mandates that blood samples be forwarded to the Testing Officer within seven days of collection. Additionally, the court found no evidence of public disturbance or disorderly conduct as required elements of the offense, making the prima facie case unsubstantiated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The court discharged the accused under the Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) due to lack of sufficient evidence. The prosecution failed to provide a mandatory medical blood test report as required by The Bombay Prohibition (Medical Examination and Blood Test) Rules, 1959, which mandates that blood samples be forwarded to the Testing Officer within seven days of collection. Additionally, the court found no evidence of public disturbance or disorderly conduct as required elements of the offense, making the prima facie case unsubstantiated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, LIMKHEDA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case