Govenment of Gujarat vs JAVASINGBHAI GALABHAI SANGADA Advocate - V P BARIA — 16/2026

Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65AA,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL on 07th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDH100000202026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

16/2026

Filing Date

08-01-2026

Registration No

16/2026

Registration Date

08-01-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SANJELI

Judge

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

Decision Date

07th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTAL

FIR Details

FIR Number

11821002250927

Police Station

SANJELI POLICE STATION - DAHOD DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

GUJARAT (BOMBAY) PROHIBITION ACT, 1949 Section 65AA,

Petitioner(s)

Govenment of Gujarat

Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

JAVASINGBHAI GALABHAI SANGADA Advocate - V P BARIA

Hearing History

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

07-03-2026

Disposed

05-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

16-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

27-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

23-01-2026

PROCESS TO ACCUSED

Final Orders / Judgements

07-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

The court acquitted the accused Jasvantsinh Galabhai Sangaria of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for alleged possession of 2 liters of country liquor worth Rs. 400 on 05/08/2025, finding the prosecution's evidence insufficient. The court held that the panchnama (seizure document) was not corroborated by the panches (witnesses) who claimed ignorance of its contents, and no independent evidence from neighbors or possession documents were presented to prove the liquor belonged to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court acquitted the accused Jasvantsinh Galabhai Sangaria of charges under the Gujarat Prohibition Act Section 65(A)(A) for alleged possession of 2 liters of country liquor worth Rs. 400 on 05/08/2025, finding the prosecution's evidence insufficient. The court held that the panchnama (seizure document) was not corroborated by the panches (witnesses) who claimed ignorance of its contents, and no independent evidence from neighbors or possession documents were presented to prove the liquor belonged to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, SANJELI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case