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
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
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
Disposed
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
PROCESS TO ACCUSED
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 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
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.
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
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts