Government of Gujarat vs MANHARBHAI LAXMANBHAI CHAUHAN — 1094/2026

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDH040011562026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1094/2026

Filing Date

16-02-2026

Registration No

1094/2026

Registration Date

16-02-2026

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

11821035251365

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)

MANHARBHAI LAXMANBHAI CHAUHAN

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &

14-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

SUMMONS - NOTICE

16-02-2026

SUMMONS - NOTICE

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER
14-03-2026
ORDER

Summary: The court discharged the accused under the Bombay Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) for consuming liquor without a permit in a public place. The court found that critical procedural requirements were not satisfied: no blood test report was submitted despite being mandatory under the Prohibition (Medical Examination and Blood Test) Rules 1959, and the blood sample was not forwarded to the FSL within the mandatory seven-day period. Additionally, no evidence of public nuisance or disorderly conduct was established on record, making the prosecution's case insufficient to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court discharged the accused under the Bombay Prohibition Act Section 66(1)(b) for consuming liquor without a permit in a public place. The court found that critical procedural requirements were not satisfied: no blood test report was submitted despite being mandatory under the Prohibition (Medical Examination and Blood Test) Rules 1959, and the blood sample was not forwarded to the FSL within the mandatory seven-day period. Additionally, no evidence of public nuisance or disorderly conduct was established on record, making the prosecution's case insufficient to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt. 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