Government of Gujarat vs RAHUL ALIAS RAMESH GOPAL DHARANI Advocate - V B JAM — 2699/2025
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 65-a-a,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTA on 25th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJDW020038122025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
2699/2025
Filing Date
19-11-2025
Registration No
2699/2025
Registration Date
19-11-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT, KHAMBHALIA
Judge
4-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGMENT BY ACQUITTA
FIR Details
FIR Number
11185004251385
Police Station
JAM KHAMBHALIA POLICE STATION – DEVBHUMI DWARKA @ KHAMBHALIYA
Year
2025
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Government of Gujarat
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
RAHUL ALIAS RAMESH GOPAL DHARANI Advocate - V B JAM
Hearing History
Judge: 4-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FURTHER STATEMENT
FURTHER STATEMENT
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 23-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 18-03-2026 | FURTHER STATEMENT | |
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION | |
| 20-02-2026 | EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Gujarati court judgment acquits the accused Ramesh Udey Rahulbhai Gopalbhai Dharani in a case involving possession of foreign liquor (Prohibition Act Section 65) due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution witnesses failed to provide credible corroboration, the panchnama (official record) lacked proper authentication, and the accusation was not substantiated by independent witnesses, thereby benefiting from the presumption of innocence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Gujarati court judgment acquits the accused Ramesh Udey Rahulbhai Gopalbhai Dharani in a case involving possession of foreign liquor (Prohibition Act Section 65) due to insufficient evidence. The court found that the prosecution witnesses failed to provide credible corroboration, the panchnama (official record) lacked proper authentication, and the accusation was not substantiated by independent witnesses, thereby benefiting from the presumption of innocence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts